American Indian Education Research Articles

Preparing teachers as allies in Indigenous education: benefits of an American Indian content and pedagogy course

The study explores relationship building and improvements in knowledge, skills, and dispositions of pre-service teachers enrolled in an Indigenous education content and pedagogy methods course. The Teaching American Indian Students in the Elementary Classroom course stands alone from other diversity education offerings at the University of Minnesota Duluth and is a required learning experience. Pre-service teachers are provided with essential knowledge and learning opportunities that facilitate success in working with Indigenous students, and helping mainstream students learn about Native history, peoples, and communities. The evaluation study was conducted by an Indigenous faculty member interested in learning how non-Native teacher education students felt they were achieving target knowledge, skills, and dispositional goals. Three separate groups of teacher education students completed both pre and post online surveys as a part of a three-year mixed methods evaluation study. The study shows significant gains made by pre-service teachers in each of the target areas, and affirms that methods coursework in American Indian education can lead to more interculturally competent teacher candidates. Helping teacher education students develop the requisite abilities and dispositions to fulfill Native American education objectives is contributory to developing future teachers as competent professionals and allies in Indigenous and diversity education.

Tailoring a web-based weight maintenance intervention for Northern Plains American Indian public university students

Objective: High levels of obesity-related health disparities are common among US American Indian (AI) populations. AI public university students often face unique challenges that may contribute to weight gain and related consequences. Few weight maintenance interventions have been developed that meet the needs of AI public university students. The goal of this study was to determine how to tailor Project Y.E.A.H. (Young Americans Eating and Active for Health), a web-delivered, weight maintenance tool developed for college students to make it culturally relevant for AI public university students. Methods: Three mini focus groups ( N = 15) and five in-depth interviews ( N = 11) were conducted with self-identified AI college students on the campus of South Dakota State University. Participants were recruited with assistance from the American Indian Education and Cultural Center and through campus publicity. Recorded sessions were transcribed and multistep coding was used to assess the aesthetic appeal of the website and determine variations of certain health-related factors. Results: AI public university students have specific and culturally influenced aesthetic, food and physical activity exposures and preferences. AI students may perceive unique stressors compared to non-AI students and practise cultural forms of stress relief. Conclusion: Specific and culturally relevant psychographic information regarding AI college student preferences is needed for the development of effective weight maintenance tools.

Community self-determination: American Indian education in Chicago, 1952-2006

Community self-determination: American Indian education in Chicago, 1952-2006

CULTURAL THEORY AND MANAGERIAL VALUES: EXAMINING TRUST AS A MOTIVATION FOR COLLABORATION

Public administration theorists have long argued that values of administrative actors fundamentally shape the quality and nature of the public services they provide. While there has been some work in recent years to measure values in the public sector like Public Service Motivation, we know relatively little about the role that other (more basic) values play in shaping managerial behaviour. To fill this gap, we argue that Cultural Theory (CT), a prominent theory within research on risk and public opinion, provides a general framework for operationalizing and measuring the values of public managers, which (if pursued) allows scholars to directly test important yet untested hypotheses about the relationship between values and managerial decision‐making. To explore this proposition, we use data from a recent survey of American Indian education directors in public school districts to examine the relationship between cultural worldviews and managerial motivation to engage actors in collaborative arrangements.

Representation and Collaboration: Exploring the Role of Shared Identity in the Collaborative Process

AbstractPublic managers must regularly engage and interact with stakeholders in the external environment to deliver meaningful policy outcomes. Examining the motivations behind such behavior is a critical component of understanding management in the modern era. Some studies suggest that actors with similar interests are more likely to form collaborative partnerships. Using an original mail survey of 150 American Indian education directors in public school districts, this article examines how shared identity and individual attitudes affect levels of interaction with Native American communities. Findings suggest that public school officials who share both a racial and a tribal/co‐ethnic identity with Native American nations in their service area have higher levels of interaction with these groups than public school officials who are either members of Native American nations outside their service area or non‐Indian. This research has broad implications for incorporating theories of representation and social construction into our understanding of collaboration.

A Study of State Social Studies Standards for American Indian Education

In this study the author surveys social studies standards from 14 U.S. states seeking to answer: (a) what social studies knowledge about American Indians is deemed essential by those states mandating the development of American Indian Education curricula for all public K–12 students? and (b) at what grade levels is this social studies content knowledge mandated in public K–12 schools? Document analysis, open-coding, and constant comparison revealed that the knowledge states standards require can be organized into six themes: identification/classification of tribes, distinct tribal cultures, contributions to mainstream U.S. culture, tribal government, connection to environment, and economics/occupations. The findings also revealed that the majority of standards relating to American Indians are directed to elementary grade levels. Standards in only two states, Maine and Montana, cover a breadth of curricular content and require that content coverage to continue K–12.

For $1,000 You Can Be a Dog Soldier: The Tribe of Should-Be-Ashamed

The use of American Indian imagery, material culture, and cultural traditions by non-Native peoples has received much recent attention by scholars, activists, and the media. However, most of the attention has been focused on sports teams and mascots. One area that has received little attention is the appropriation of Indian imagery and traditions by non-sports related organizations. This article details a recent meeting between members of the American Indian Health Research and Education Alliance (AIHREA) and leaders from the Tribe of the Mic-O-Say. The Tribe of the Mic-O-Say is a Boy Scouts of America™ honor society for Scouts in eastern Kansas and western Missouri who want to "play Indian." The Mic-O-Say have a long history of misappropriating and misrepresenting Indian culture and traditions as well as engaging in cultural imperialism. This alienates Native people from their traditions, undermines self-determination, and creates further animosity and distrust between Natives and non-Natives.

Sovereignty and Education: An Overview of the Unique Nature of Indigenous Education

J O U R N A L O F A M E R I C A N I N D I A N E D U C A T I O N – 5 4 , I S S U E 1 1 Editors’ Introduction Sovereignty and Education: An Overview of the Unique Nature of Indigenous Education bryan mckinley jones brayboy, susan c. faircloth, tiffany s. lee, margaret j. maaka, and troy a. richardson According to creek scholar K. Tsianina Lomawaima (2000), “The history of American Indian education can be summarized in three simple words: battle for power” (p. 2). This statement concisely illustrates the larger complex struggle regarding the schooling of American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians. Education was and in many ways continues to be (1) a battle for the hearts and minds of Indigenous nations; (2) a colonial call for assimilation; and (3) a responsibility of the federal government arising from a series of agreements between Indian nations and the United States meant to open up land bases to a burgeoning immigrant population. In short, the education of Indigenous peoples is intricately intertwined with the legal/political relationship between Indigenous peoples and the U.S. government, as well as myriad racist policies and practices that have devastated Indian children and communities.1 In this introduction, we briefly outline this relationship and offer an overview of the articles that follow. Indigenous peoples2 have inhabited the lands that comprise the contemporary “United States of America” since long before its origination as a nation-state. Without the almost 400 treaty3 agreements signed between the first inhabitants and the European emigrants, which resulted in the ceding of over 1 billion acres of land, the United States could not have been established (for more details regarding this subject see, generally , the work of: Vine Deloria Jr., Vine Deloria Jr. and Clifford M. Lytle, Rebecca A. Tsosie, David Wilkins, and Robert A. Williams). Congress later ratified these treaties, or agreements between equals. Today, these treaty agreements remain in effect, holding the United States responsible 2 J O U R N A L O F A M E R I C A N I N D I A N E D U C A T I O N – 5 4 , I S S U E 1 for providing for the general welfare of the American Indian peoples as well as supplying critical social services, such as health care and education (Deloria & Lytle, 1983). This arrangement, which confers a special relationship unlike any other, has historically influenced and continues to influence schooling for American Indians. In order to better understand and appreciate the unique educational challenges facing present-day American Indian and Alaska Native communities,4 it is important to understand their unique history and political relationship with the United States. The legacy of European invasion, incessant attempts to dispossess American Indians of their lands and culture(s), and the cumulative effects of colonization and forced assimilation have resulted in a unique context from which to understand Indigenous education and the persistence of tribal communities . Our hope is to offer a primer for those unfamiliar with Indigenous education and to offer a refresher and framing mechanism for those familiar with the education of Indigenous peoples. What Does American Indian “Sovereignty” Mean? American Indian, as well as Alaska Native (AI/AN) and Native Hawaiian populations, are the most diverse in the country. American Indians, in particular, represent more than 560 distinct federally recognized tribes (sometimes referred to as tribal nations)5 and at least half as many distinct state-recognized groups (U.S. Census Bureau, 2007). Each tribal nation has its own history, culture, and language. Although not all tribes are federally recognized, those who are share in common their distinctive government-to-government relationship with the federal government. Moreover, enrolled members of such tribes have the benefit of multiple citizenships (e.g., to tribal/Indigenous nation, nationstate , state, and in some cases, clan societies) wherein they do not lose civil rights because of their status as tribal citizens, and individual tribal citizens are not denied tribal rights because of their U.S. citizenship (Deloria & Lytle, 1983). Given their unique history and political...

American Indian Educational Attainment

American Indian Educational Attainment

Culture, Place, and Power: Engaging the Histories and Possibilities of American Indian Education

I am honored and humbled to have the opportunity to consider the role of history and its relationship to “American Indian education” in this special issue of theHistory of Education Quarterly.Before I offer some commentary and ideas, I want to offer a caveat—or a confession—that should inform the way my paper is read. My caveat/confession is that I am not a historian, let alone a historian of education. Instead, I am an “Indigenous” anthropologist of education. Of anthropologists, Vine Deloria Jr. has written, “Into each life, it is said, some rain must fall… But Indians have been cursed above all other people in history. Indians have anthropologists.” My own thinking about anthropology is that much of Deloria's disdain is well placed. Some of what anthropologists do, however—listen to stories and engage with people and place—is useful to conversations about what American Indian education is and can be. In this case, sometimes rain feeds growth. It is from this viewpoint of growth and possibility that I offer my thoughts on the role of history, its methods, and what this might mean for American Indian education.

History without Silos, Ignorance versus Knowledge, Education beyond Schools

Contributors to this thematic issue of theQuarterlycall education historians' scholarly attention to the particularities of Native histories and the diverse ways that Native people experience and think about our worlds. Their call to envision—or re-vision—histories of Indigenous education weaves together suggestive directions for productive scholarly inquiry. In my commentary, I focus on three of their main points. First, they note the unfortunate phenomenon of academic “silo-ization” that all too often leads to a disciplinary tunnel vision blocking our view of useful—even necessary—sources, archives, methods, evidence, perspectives, questions, and analytic frameworks. Second, they point out the vast and critical difference between two common interpretations of the phrase “American Indian education,” which is to say the difference between Indigenous self-education and colonial education of Indians by settlers and their institutions. Over the last five centuries, the divide between educationbyIndians and educationforIndians has been glaringly obvious to Native peoples but often conveniently ignored by others. That willful ignorance, of course, has been necessary to the settler colonial imperative to “eliminate the Native” and thus solidify settler claims to lands and national identity itself. Third, they make an urgent and timely call for more attention to Indigenous educational philosophies and practices in Indigenous contexts, that is,education(in Bailyn's terms) outside of the walls of (usually colonial)schools.They direct our attention to teaching, learning, and intergenerational transmission of knowledge embedded within and constitutive of Native histories.

A Second Wave of Hopi Migration

The current issue in the History of Education Quarterly is significant for various reasons. For the first time in the journal's history, scholars from several disciplines have converged to address topics relating to the history of American Indian education. The essays challenge historians to think of research methodologies that go beyond the traditional sources of documents retrieved from archives and other depositories. This is perhaps most clearly seen in KuuNUx TeeRIt Kroupa's essay on the Arikara Cultural Center and his attempt to understand their educational history through an Arikara lens of understanding. It is also evident in Adrea Lawrence's idea of “epic learning” and her inclusion of “Native” stories and their relationship to “place” as a frame to interpret American Indian education histories. Each of these articles, including Donald Warren's piece on Native history as education history, urges historians to think more broadly on how to create Indian education narratives. However, my intention here is not to provide a comprehensive response to all three essays. Rather, I want to briefly apply key topics in each text to help enlighten my own research on Hopis and the off-reservation Indian boarding school experience, and to offer some direction on how these issues might be applied to current and future studies.

The History of the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, 1600–2012 by David Miller et al. (review)

Reviewed by: The History of the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, 1600–2012 by David Miller et al. Sweeney Windchief The History of the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, 1600–2012. By David Miller, Dennis Smith, Joseph McGeshik, James Shanley, and Caleb Shields. Poplar mt: Fort Peck Community College, 2012. xiii + 592 pp. Photographs, maps, notes, index. $80.00 paper. A Montana state constitutional amendment in 1972, coupled with American Indian connection to education and representation in the state legislature, led to the Montana Indian Education for All Act. This law gave Montana tribes support in writing their own histories. The collective work of Miller, Smith, McGeshik, Shanley, and Shields provides a historical foundation for the Great Plains’ original peoples as they establish their own histories in the curriculums of their public school systems. The authors, in addition to prolific historical accounts, use a bifurcated system of delivery that examines the tribes separately. This maintains that all tribes represented on the reservation have their specific and distinctive histories, cultures, and ontologies. The work includes an examination of the complexity and continuous development of intertribal relationships. The book is comprehensive in its approach in addressing the way in which the Assiniboine and Sioux tribes have experienced multiple administrations and continue to operate in relation to federal Indian policy. Critique can only be related to missing stories in the history presented. The content and therefore the responsibility of these stories belongs to the respective families, and may or may not be shared depending upon one’s context and perspective. The duplication of photographs (p. 252 replicated on p. 281, and p. 434 repeated on p. 522) and misspellings (p. vi) reveal proofreading oversight. The majority of the book’s content is comprised of information extracted from historical documentation around tribal leadership, history, and development in a context specific to the particular tribes. This is an integral part of the broader story of the Great Plains and highlights the people, policies, and practices of the Northern Plains specifically in and around Montana. Scholars from the Fort Peck Indian community authored this book, providing an authenticity often missed when written by scholars from outside. From the delineation of homelands inhabited at the time of contact through the twenty-first-century context, the information in this book potentially prompts further academic work (i.e., tribal leadership, the North American bison, American Indian education including the tribal college movement, and economic development). In conclusion, this work [End Page 288] provides information essential to the future of the indigenous peoples of the Great Plains. Sweeney Windchief Adult and Higher Education Montana State University Copyright © 2014 Center for Great Plains Studies, University of Nebraska–Lincoln

NSF-OEDG Manoomin Science Camp Project: A Model for Engaging American Indian Students in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics

ABSTRACTThe Manoomin “wild rice” Science Camp program, a partnership between the University of Minnesota, the Fond du Lac Tribal and Community College, and the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa is an example of how a community-based participatory research project can become the catalyst for STEM learning for an entire community, providing effective learning opportunities for grades 5–12 and undergraduate students, elementary and secondary school teachers, and scientists from the reservation, tribal college, and university. Focusing the research on a resource (wild rice) that has important economic, cultural and spiritual meaning for a community, we promote place-based education and support the development of strong science/teacher/community partnerships. Key components of this approach are the Circle of Learning, a conceptual framework that emphasizes trust- and relationship-building between researchers, teachers, students, and American Indian community members, and the Seven Elements of STEM Learning, a pedagogical framework derived from an extensive review of the literature on American Indian education that focuses on a holistic approach to learning that emphasizes the whole student.

School Culture and American Indian Educational Outcomes

American Indians have the lowest educational attainment rates of any group in the United States. Researchers have attributed this educational disparity gap that American Indians experience to the lack of cultural relevance in mainstream educational settings. American Indian students perceive a cultural bias against them in classroom curriculum as well as pedagogical practices. While some states have passed legislation to support teaching about American Indians, no funding to support culturally relevant curriculum changes or teacher training accompany these measures. Successful American Indian college students learn how to develop a strong academic identity, while retaining strong cultural ties. A continuing educational gap in access to higher education, in a knowledge-based economy affects the socio-economic status of families and tribes. Incorporating tribal values into mainstream schools would not only educational connections for American Indian students, but can also enhance the learning environment for all students.

Technology Integration in American Indian Education: An Overview

This article highlights current efforts to use educational technology in Indian Country with K-12 students, situated within the larger discourse on digital equity. The author argues that the current literature on digital equity marginalizes Native students by providing a narrow view of technology integration in American Indian education. As dynamic and innovative peoples, tribes are using and have used technologies to support the revitalization of language and culture, move Native students from consumers to producers of digital content and to strengthen tribal identity and sovereignty. Despite these recent trends, very little research has been conducted on the ways in which technology is, can and should serve Native students. This article centers stories of technological creativity and health while also describing potential frameworks for interested parties to engage in a discussion about ways in which educational technologies can support and strengthen Native students in the 21st century.

IN MEMORIAM: George Dearborn Spindler 1920-2014

IN MEMORIAM GeorgeDearbornSpindler 1920-2014 George Spmdler athis 85th birthday celebration, 2005. (Photo courtesy of Spindler family archives.) GeorgeDearborn Spindler was an anthropologist for67 ofhis94 years,mostin close cooperation withhis wife,Louise. Theyweremarried for56 yearsand anthropologists together for50 years, untilshepassedawayin 1997.Theirfirst decade in anthropology was sharedwiththeMenomini (now Menominee) people of Wisconsin and focused on the use of psychologicaltests in ethnographic fieldwork. They workedwiththe Menominiforseven summers (1948-1954) and returned forbrief annualvisitsfordecades.They wouldhavelikedanygroupofpeople- thatis thewaytheywere- buttheMenomini touched their souls. In 1951,Georgestarted fieldwork in middle-class American schools, butthey disrupted hissoul.He disliked howthedominant American culture was forcing the Menominiintoassimilation, but he was in awe of the ingenuity andpersonal integrity withwhichthepeopleresisted. Traditional Menomini education, he saidin 1963,was "successfully refractive ... tothe educational experience contrived by theagentsof thedominant society." Among traditional Menomini,educational"encountersare nearly all favorable to thechild,and,as a consequence, [s]/he developsverylittle by wayofrecalcitrant or ambivalent feelings towards adultsor whatever they wouldhavehimlearn."In American schools, wracked byfierce competition andtheopposingdemandto appearegalitarian, bothchildren andteachers werepsychologically divided andinconstant badfaith with eachother. Spindler wastrained intheassumptions andmethods oftheculture and personality schoolthat headlined American anthropology from 1930to 1955 withstudiesof dreams,fears,wishes,and neuroses.He and Louise used projective techniques - often modified to fittheparticulars oftheculture under analysis - inall their fieldwork. Theirearlyworkwith theMenomini soughtto characterize thecorepersonality typesof individuals. After the collapseof personality studiesin thelate 1950s,Spin (as he was known) stayedthecourse,butworried moreabouttheenvironments shapingand maintaining whathebeganin 1968tocall the"cognitive orientation" ofthe people theystudied.Personality studiestendedto isolateand stereotype individuals as theproduction centerof societiesand theirproblems, but Spin'slaterwork - by1959forAmerican education, by1963for Menomini education - emphasized individualsengagedin struggles organizedby 4 Journal of American Indian Education -Volume 53,Issue2,2014 others. Ifprojective techniques showeddeeplydividedsouls,Spinwanted to showhowemerging circumstances madethedifference. Because their analyticvocabularychanged over the years, the Spindlers' workwith theMenomini canbestbe readbackwards. Theywould preferit. When theypublishedDreamerswithout Power in 1971, the "without"was meantto emphasizethe poundingput upon Menomini individuals bymainstream Americans. Whentheir Menomini friends raised an alternative perspective, theSpindlers changedthetitletoDreamerswith Power.Itfitbetter themorecritical viewthey hadbeendeveloping. Culture andpersonality theory brought them insights, butshielded them from others. Washawaythepersonality focus, andthere is muchtoappreciate. Spinwrote lovelyaccountsofgreetings, silences,andquestion-answer linkagesamong theMenomini, buttreated themas products of thecharacter structure of individuals. He appreciated whenothers longlater described thesameevents as interactional accomplishments. In hislastpaper,in 2008,Spinsuggested thatprojectivetechniqueswere disappointing scientific tools, but great contexts for meaningful conversations. He likedrenewal. Spinwitnessed anddocumented cultural changesofall kinds.During hislongteaching careerhe lovedtomentor students. At Stanford, he was a keyfaculty person for first generations ofNativeAmerican andother minority students entering university life.His struggle across 60 yearsof writing anthropology was to capturethehumanity of people getting through life together. Kind,gentle, andappreciative alwayscamefirst, although he hada goodeyefor thecontradictions inhabiting every life. He hada large institutional career, butwanted onlytoputittogooduse.He taught 40,000students, but had no desirefora following. He becameknownas thefounder of the anthropology of education, butrejected thetitleand resisted anyidolatry. With no head for business,he ran a small empirefor introductory anthropology texts,including 200 case studies, morethan20 focusing on NativeAmerican cultures. For countless students acrossthecountry, these case studies offered their first understanding ofNativeAmerican cultures as richandrewarding worlds, alternatives totheir own. GeorgeSpindler lovedto do work.He lovedtopublishhisworkand other people'swork.On a great day,he wouldblurthelinesbetween work, relaxation, family andfriends whilewaiting fora publication toarrive inthe mail.He was kindto all whocamehisway,andifanyonewas notkindto him, hewouldonlysay,"I don'tunderstand why." - RayMcDermott, Professor ofEducation andAnthropology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA Janice E. Stockard, Editor, Case Studies inCultural Anthropology and Lecturer, St.Mary'sCollege,Moraga,CA August 4,2014 Journal of American Indian Education -53,Issue2,2014 5 GeorgeSpindler andI werebothbornin North Central Wisconsin, andhe was rearedthere. I came to realizeovertheyearsnotonlyhow muchhe respected people- thedetailsoftheir dailylivesandtheingenuity oftheir dailyresourcefulness - butalsohowdeepwashisawareness andrespect for place. He had come to care verymuch forthe people who lived in Menominee County andhealso lovedthelanditself - itswaters, itsforests. He hunted and fishedin thosewoods and lakes,and did so withrespect, returning toMenominee County everysummer thathe couldandstaying as longas possibleintothefall,givena taxingacademicscheduleandcareer. Laterinlifehecametohavea similar appreciation oftheimportance ofplace as helivedandconducted research ina smallvillageinGermany. Ina sense, his critiqueof modernAmericansocietywas thatit was without place, without rootedness. Yet he didnotjustromanticize a primal utopiaas some anthropologists havedone- hewasrealistic about change, itsnecessity, andits concomitants. In all this, acrossa longlifespan,heheldtrue tothevaluesof modesty andkindliness, learned ina Midwestern childhood. - Frederick Erickson, Inaugural Kneller ChairofAnthropology and Education, Emeritus, UCLA Garrett...

A Note from the JAIE Editorial Staff: With Appreciation — As We Move To a New Publisher and Format

A Note from the JAIE Editorial Staff With Appreciation - As We Move To a New Publisher and Format This issue State issue 54.1 University's of (Spring JAIE marks 2015), Center the the for last University Indian as an"in-house" Education ofMinnesota (CIE). publication Press Beginning will ofArizona assume with StateUniversity's Center forIndianEducation(CIE). Beginning with issue54.1 (Spring 2015),theUniversity ofMinnesota Presswillassume responsibility forpublishing, disseminating, andmarketing theJournal. We embark onthispathafter considerable deliberation andwithgreatoptimism, as it will ensurea more securefinancialfuture and a more extensive readership basefor theJournal ,whilebestowing theimprimatur andextensive publishing expertise of a premier academicpress.We arehonored to have JAIEincludedamongtheUniversity of MinnesotaPresspublications. All editorial decisions - theintake, review, anddecision-making onmanuscripts - willremain with theeditors affiliated with theCIE, andtheArizonaBoard ofRegents willretain theJournal9 s copyright. After53 yearsof in-housepublication, theJournalhas amasseda significant debtofgratitude. In thespace allotted, we cannotthank all who havecontributed to JAIE'slongevity and standing in thefieldas a leading scholarly journalinAmerican IndianandIndigenous education. We do want to acknowledge thedistinguished editors whocamebefore us: founding coeditors Robert A. Roessel, Jr. andBruceS. Meador, George Gill(Omaha),John TippeconnicIII (Comanche),JohnRedhorse(Cherokee),Karen Gayton Swisher Comeau(Standing RockSioux),Octaviana Trujillo(Yoeme),Denis Viri,and David Beaulieu(WhiteEarthChippewa).The Journal wouldnot havesurvived forso longwithout thededication andtalent ofthelateLaura Williams, whoservednineeditors over30 years, carefully monitoring JAIE subscriptions andadministration. We also thank thelegionofexpert scholars whohaveservedas manuscript reviewers, andmembers ofJAIE'seditorial board,whoseeditorial guidancehas been invaluable.We thankour local printer, IronwoodLithographers, and IronwoodPressrepresentative Randy Peck,who,amongother services "beyond thecall,"frequently hand-delivered pageproofs andpersonally oversaw thedelivery ofpublished issues.Andwe expressourdeepappreciation to James(Jim)Ross,theJournal'stypesetter formorethanhalfof its life.Jim'sattention to detail,carefuleye for inconsistencies and errors, sense of aesthetics, and eternalpatiencewith overshot deadlines areattributes that havegreatly supported oureditorial staff andensured a consistent, visually attractive, high-quality product. 68 Journal of American Indian Education -Volume 53,Issue3,2014 We save ourfinalthanks toyou,theJournal's readers. We knowyou bring thesamepassionandcommitment tothefieldofAmerican Indianand IndigenouseducationthatinspiredJAIE's establishment and has been instrumental toitscontinuance. So, comeSpring, pleaselookfora newcover designandpublisher, butthesamedistinctive JASE content. We lookforward toinaugurating thisnext erainthelifeoftheJournal with you. - Bryan McKinley Jones Brayboy, K. Tsianina Lomawaima, and TeresaL. McCarty, Co-editors - Jeston Morris, Assistant Editor - MarieLevie,BusinessandSubscription Manager Journal of American Indian Education -53,Issue3,2014 69 ...

Editors' Introduction Familiar Challenges, Innovative Possibilities in American Indian and Indigenous Education

Editors' Introduction Familiar Challenges, Innovative Possibilities in American Indian and Indigenous Education We trust thisfinds youwellandthat, as yoursummer comestoa close,you aregearing upforanexciting fall.We areexcited topresent a robust issuefor you- robust in terms ofitsvolume,intellectual rigor, andapplications to practice. Thisissueillustrates thesignificant challenges that ourcommunities, schools,andchildren face,as wellas therichpossibilities ofwhatmayliein front ofthem. We applaudeachoftheauthors inpresenting issuesthat areat onceall toofamiliar andwhichhelpus think aboutnewwaysofaddressing theneedsofIndigenous communities andpeoples. The challenges confronting ourcommunities andtheir children areall toofamiliar. MichellePidgeonreminds us thattheneedforbetter, stronger pathways tohigher education is universal throughout North America, buther findings andrecommendations haveimplications onan international scaleas well.Carolyn Brownhighlights another critical (and understudied) areaschooldiscipline disparities for Nativeyouth - pointing tothewaysinwhich in-school and out-of-schoolsuspensions lead to permanentschool withdrawal, disrupt a crucial pathway tocollege,andreinforce theschool-toprison pipeline, especially amongNativeboysandyoung men.TreyAdcock callsfora wayofrethinking the"digital divide"as a vehicle fordigital equity andimplores ustothink morebroadly anddeeply abouttheroleoftechnology inourcommunities. Estrella Torrez documents theroleofa youth program in helping urbanNativeyouth connect withtheir heritage as a pathto healthy lifestyles, including replacing "whitefoods"(whitesugar,flour, and lard associated with White colonization) with foodsandactivities rooted inculture andcommunity. JiaxiWu andMarciaGentry highlight theappalling lackof programs andsupport for gifted Native students, andexamine the experiences and perceptions ofgifted Dine students in a university-based summer residential program. Finally,Thad Connerilluminates thechallengesassociatedwith publicschoolsontribal landsandtheneedforcoherent coordination between schoolsandcommunities. Each ofthesearticles presents compelling datathatremind us ofthe challenges ourchildren andcommunities faceintheir day-to-day interactions with schoolsandeducational institutions. Thesechallenges arenotnew.What isnewaretheresponses that theauthors present. Theyforce ustonameagain thefactthat, rather thanasking, "How canwe makeourIndigenous children readyforschools?",we shouldbe asking, "How can we makeeducational institutions ready forourchildren?" Journal of American Indian Education -53,Issue2,2014 1 The articlesalso pointto realistic, proactive responsesto education challenges thatarewithin thepowerofourcommunities andtheeducators andschoolsthatservethem. Whilerecognizing thatinstitutions areslowto change,Dr. Pidgeonoffers a wholistic responseto makinginstitutions of higher education notonlymoreaccessible,butalso places of successand possibility. Dr.Adcockreminds usthat Indigenous communities havealways hadforms oftechnology, andtheyarereclaiming electronic technologies to engageincultural andlanguage revitalization, as wellas other forms ofselfdetermination . Dr. Connerpointsto places whereschool districts have recognized thefederal trust responsibility associatedwithAmerican Indian education.His workhas implications forhow educationadministration programs prepare future principals andsuperintendents whoworkinschools and districts servingNative childrenand communities. Dr. Brownasks institutions toconsider howthey engagediscipline with Nativechildren. Her workalso has significant implications forhow schools and colleges of educationprepareteachersand administrators. Dr. Gentryand doctoral candidate Jiaxi Wudocument howgifted Dinestudents successfully engaged withethnically andculturally diverse peersina summer residential program thatenhanced theirintellectual and social-emotional development. Finally, Dr. Torrezintroduces theAnnishinabe conceptsof edinizing (community), naadizewin (culture), minomaadiziwin (health), andkendaasewin (academics) as waystohelpurbanNativeyoungpeopleengagestrategies ofwellbeing that areas oldas thepeopleswhoformulated them. Importantly, thesearticles all moveawayfrom a singular response to challenges toresponses thatare multifaceted and wholistic. These are creative, self-determining responses that we woulddo welltofollow. We hopeyoufind thesearticles as thought provoking andcompelling as wehave. We alsopause,inthefirst pagesofthisissue,toreflect onthelifeand contributions ofGeorgeDearborn Spindler, whopassedawayon July1 of thisyearattheage of94. Withhiswifeandacademicpartner of50 years, Louise, George Spindler founded and led the field of educational anthropology - a field in whichmany scholarsof AmericanIndian/ Indigenous education, including eachofus,havefound a welcoming home. As notedby Ray McDermott - a close colleague and self-proclaimed discipleofGeorgeSpindler - "Spin,"as hewas affectionately known, with Louise, began workingwiththe Menominee(Menomini)in the 1960s, comparingMenomineeeducationwith thatof the school. Menominee education, they argued, contained alltheelements toprepare young peopletobe successfuladults.Indeed,the Spindlerslaterwrote,whereasIndigenous education systems "are designedfor,[and]in factguarantee success,"the education practices ofdominant schooling "seemdesigned toassuresuccess for some,andfailure for others" (Spindler & Spindler, 1989,p. 14).Wethank RayMcDermott, Janice Stockard, andFrederick Erickson fortheir beautiful andlovingportraits ofan intellectual giantin ourfieldwho,thesescholars 2 Journal of American Indian Education -Volume 53,Issue2,2014 remind us, was mostimportantly a kindand compassionate humanbeing. GeorgeSpindler servedas inspiration and mentor to manyofus; his keen intellect, wit, andgenerous spirit willbe sorely missed. Finally, youwillnoticea third nameintheeditorial team.In January 2014,ArizonaStateUniversity washonored tohaveK. TsianinaLomawaima join itsfaculty as Professor ofJustice andSocial Inquiry andDistinguished Scholar of IndigenousEducation.ProfessorLomawaimais one of the preeminent ethnohistorians of AmericanIndian education,and she has published withbothTeresaandBryan.Herposition intheSchoolofSocial Transformation and the Centerfor Indian Education,along with her extraordinary intellectual contributions to the field of AmericanIndian educationand IndigenousStudiesmore broadly,made her an obvious additionto our team.HavingProfessor Lomawaima,who has servedon JME" s editorial boardforthepastfouryears, join us as coeditor feelslike welcominga familymemberhome.We are fortunate to have her as a colleagueandfriend, andwe hopeyouwilljoin us inwelcoming hertothis neweditorial...

Introduction to the Special Issue Examining and Applying Safety Zone Theory: Current Policies, Practices, and Experiences

Introduction to the Special Issue Examining and Applying Safety Zone Iheory: Current Policies, Practices» and Experiences K. TsianinaLomawaima and Teresa L. McCarty The 2014 symposium three Annual articles organized published Meeting byCynthia in of this the Benally special American issue andTimothy were Educational first San presented Pedro Research at in the a symposium organized byCynthia BenallyandTimothy SanPedroatthe 2014 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Associationin Philadelphia. Teresa L. McCartychairedthe session,and K. TsianinaLomawaimaoffered comments as thediscussant. In guiding the issue, we thankour colleagueand co-editor Dr. BryanMcKinleyJones Brayboy fortaking thelead as developmental editor inorder topreserve the integrity of J AIE's double-blind peer reviewprocess,and to ensurethe highest standard ofquality review andeditorial oversight. Benally, Lansing, andSanPedrodrawupon,implement, andextend the framework ofSafety ZoneTheory (SZT) articulated inour(2006) book,"7b Remainan Indian ě'" Lessons in Democracyfroma Century of Native American Education. We arehumbled andgratified that thesekeenly critical scholars find thetheory useful andworthwhile toengage,and- importantly - pushbeyondour framesand articulations to open up new questions, developnewinterpretations, proposenew(or stretch old) terminology, and buildmultiple levelsofanalysis usingSZT. In whatfollows, we first revisit thetheory's originsand ourintention in proposing it as an alternative to conventional "swingsofthependulum" analysesoffederal Indianeducation policy. Wethen introduce eachofthe articles, highlighting the waysinwhich they takeup SZT in theiranalyses.At theend of theissue we offer further commentary that wehopewillbothclarify ouruseofSZT, andilluminate the newusesandimplications ofthetheory as developed bythescholars herein. Safety Zone TheoryOrigins A unifying theme acrossthisspecialissueis theauthors' shared emphasis on decolonizing methodologies. Consideration ofwhat is required toproductively decolonize methodology frames a brief history ofourintellectual trajectory as we developedSZT. A stanceof criticalinquiryinforms much of the scholarship within Indigenous studies broadly andIndigenous education more specifically. Thestanceis rooted inIndigenous perspectives, epistemologies, Journal of American Indian Education -53,Issue3,2014 1 andexperiences andgenerates anapproach that might wellbe summed up as "Question everything! Take nothingfor granted!"We believe that a distinctive attribute of a decolonizing methodology is therefusal to accept dominant ideologiesat facevalue andto ask thecritical questions:"What hidden agendasmight thisideology serve? Whobenefits from thisideological stance?" SZT beganas we confronted apparent anomaliesin theideologyof erase-and-replace assimilation. Theturn ofthe20thcentury, roughly from the 1880s through the 1920s, could be arguedas the zenithof the U.S. assimilationist agenda.Federalreservation agencies,on-andoff-reservation day and boardingschools,and churchmissionswere all conceivedas laboratories toimplement a powerful suiteofpoliciesandpractices designed - we're told- to assimilate American Indians.The removalof children from families, English-only manuallaboreducation, landallotment, federal trustauthority to manageIndigenousresources, unrestricted (or plenary) Congressionalaction to controlNative governance, land dispossession, criminalization ofNativereligions andeconomies, andextreme policepowers converged inaneffort toeraseevery traceofIndian-ness and"Americanize" thefirst Americans. Figure1, a photograph fromtheFortMojave Indian Schoolearlyinthe20thcentury, visually sumsuptheassimilationist agenda andthewaysinwhich itpunished Nativestudents. Butthenwe areconfronted bytheanomalies: historic photosofsmall tipismade fromtableclothsas students fromtheNorthern and Southern Plainswereallowed, evenencouraged, torecreate miniature campswithin the confines ofboarding schoolplaygrounds; bilingual readers produced bythe BureauofIndianAffairs (see Figure2); boarding schoolclassesintheskills to producerugs,pottery, and basketry; and the preservation of tribal communal property in- ofallthings - the1924IndianCitizenship Act,the assimilationists' purported pinnacle ofachievement. As we turn ouranalytic lens towardfederalpolicies laterin the century, we findmore blatant anomalies, as theU.S. government passedthenation'sfirst andonlyextant official languagepolicy,theNativeAmerican LanguagesActof 1990/1992, reversing morethantwocenturies ofofficial andunofficial policiesbanning NativeAmerican languages inAmerican Indian-serving schools.As wewrote inourbook,"Whata difference 100yearsmake!"(Lomawaima& McCarty, 2006,p. 134). Atfirst blush, theanomalies prompted theresponse, "Howodd.Itmust be anoversight, oranaccident." Buttheinadequacy ofthat dismissive response was quickly madeevident bythefrequency andsubstance oftheanomalies. Thereweretoomanyofthem, occurring attoomanycritical junctures. They did seem, however,to operatein the historical recordas anomalies,as "exceptions that provedtherule,"so tospeak.Theydidnotderailprocesses ofassimilation, butthey clearly contradicted theideologyinessential ways. So, itseemedthat wecouldnotsimply accepttheideology offull, erase-and2 Journal of American Indian Education -Volume 53,Issue3,2014 Figure 1. "FortMojave IndianSchool,"fromtheA. P. Millercollection, ArizonaStateMuseum, University ofArizona. replaceassimilation atitsfacevalue.We asked:Whatother agendasmight be servedby theU.S. government choosingto perpetuate a controlled set of carefullyselected,carefullydomesticated, iconic markersof nationally defined "Indian-ness?"1 Ouranswers tothequestions, "Whatother agendasmight be served?" and"Whobenefits?" generated Safety ZoneTheory. Inanarticle inAmerican Educational Research Journal ,weaddressed the"entangled forces" that have directed thenation-state's "dancebetween 'safe'and'dangerous' difference" in the"contest between Nativeeducational sovereignty andfederal constraints" Journal of American Indian Education -53,Issue3,2014 3 Figure2. Thesearea fewofthebilingual IndianLifeReadersproduced in the early 1940s by the Bureau of IndianAffairswithEnglish/heritage language texts onfacing pages,inLakota(About theHenofWahpeton; Clark, 1943a),Spanish(YoungHunter ofPicuris ; Clark...