The author and tour guide Audrey Pictou explain the role of Native American stories during the introduction of a Haunted Bar Harbor tour, allowing guests to prepare for new ideas that may be challenging to their own world views. •

Interpreting Native American Heritage through Ghost Stories

J E N N I F E R P I C T O U ____________________

Native American heritage can be one of the most difficult and rewarding topics to tackle. It can be a source of great interest for visitors, but also one of intimidating ideas and frustration for interpreters. Take heart, because it doesn’t have to be that way! There really is a middle ground and sometimes it comes in unexpected ways.

I am a member of a Federally Recognized Tribe (Aroostook Band of Micmacs), hold the position of Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, and have been interpreting Native issues and heritage for over two decades. I now tackle the issue head on through my own company, which provides an experience called the

“Haunted Bar Harbor” tour. This may seem incongruous, but there is a method to my interpretive madness. I will present here some of the challenges to interpreting Native heritage in Maine and how we deal with them through the vehicle of ghosts and Wabanaki Indian tales of the supernatural using a few simple guidelines.

The biggest challenge to interpreting Native American heritage is authenticity and there is no more contentious subtopic than Native interpreters versus non-Native interpreters. While there is no one better to interpret a cultural topic than someone who is actually part of the resource culture, it doesn’t mean quality interpretation cannot be given by someone

HEATHER

outside that culture. However, having a representative from the resource culture does give a level of authenticity that many visitors look for. I have often seen interpretive situations where a visitor has said, “I want to talk to the guy with long hair because he is a real Indian.” This does a disservice to both Native and non-Native interpreters, because the non-Native can feel resentful and unacknowledged while a Native interpreter can feel burned out by the burden of so many visitors looking for the “real” Indian. To address this challenge, we have chosen to currently employ Native interpreters for our Haunted Bar Harbor tour due to the sensitive subject of spirit stories while other tours are led by non-Native guides. When possible,

28 Septem ber/October 2015

getting first-voice interpretation can be an invaluable and necessary component but in the absence of such, getting source material from reputable Native tribal resources can be the next best thing.

Finding the right story or cultural context can also be a daunting challenge based on the mission of the interpreter’s organization or program purpose. Connecting those ideas to the content of an interpretive program can be even more difficult. Native American stories and events need to be related to visitors in the same manner as they were originally and culturally intended. If this cannot be accomplished, a Native story or event should not be used to illustrate a point. For example, there are several wonderful Wabanaki spirit stories we do not use because they have no relatable segue to local ghost stories and to use them would take them out of cultural context. We are addressing this by saving those stories for special programs given at events when we partner with local organizations.

Cultivating cultural connections is also a key component of interpreting

Native American heritage and one of the most difficult things to get when creating a program. This deceptively simple idea is the way understanding and connecting with visitors can really happen. Otherwise, the interpreter risks losing authority and validity with the audience. An example of how we address this issue is to connect tribal spirit beliefs regarding the Wabanaki Little People and how many references to little spirits visitors already know, such as Tinkerbell from Disney’s Peter Pan and Dobby the House Elf from the Harry Potter series. By connecting multiple pop culture ideas at once, we allow visitors the opportunity to see how many cross-cultural beliefs have become mainstream, which opens their receptiveness to Native spirit stories having valid and relatable meaning in their own lives.

The idea of Native American imagery is a hot topic these days, when the debate over headdresses and mascots is larger than life. Many visitors come with a preconceived notion of what an Indian should look like so we take great care to bust the ‘buckskin stereotype” by having our

The author uses traditional Micmac storytelling methods to weave tales of a Native spirit world into understandable connections with tangible landscapes and historic buildings for tour guests.

guides dress in period clothing for the eras tours focus on. This means a guide will dress in appropriate garb depicting the Cottage Era of Bar Harbor for this tour because it is the perfect way to educate about cross- cultural borrowing, particularly of clothing styles. Guides keep several historic photo images on hand showing Native women wearing hoop skirts combined with beaded peaked cap designs (a traditional Wabanaki womens’ head covering) and other accessories should a guest address this idea or show confusion as to why we are not dressed “like an Indian.” Part of the fun is continually researching and adding historically correct accessories such as Native beaded bags and jewelry that were popular for Victorian women to wear. These looks are not only culturally appropriate but add dimension and sometimes even a hands-on experience for the visitor when a guide passes around a beaded item for them to hold.

Interpreting Native American heritage cannot be confined to one essay, but a few major guidelines have been discussed here. The topic can be a great addition to interpretive programming if delivered in a manner that makes the cultural context relatable to the visitor and is conducted in a culturally appropriate manner. When in doubt about how to present Native heritage, ask a recognized and respected representative of the resource culture. By combining voices from Native tribes and non-Native elements, an interpretive program can be fun, enlightening, and result in some very interesting consequences such as new cross-cultural understanding, further inquiries, and a return investment of customers and referrals to your organization.

Jennifer is the owner of Dawnland Tours, LLC. She is an NAI Certified Interpretive Trainer, Certified Interpretive Host Trainer, Certified Interpretive Guide, and Certified Interpretive Host, as well as being a historian and Tribal Historic Preservation Officer.

Legacy 29

Copyright of Legacy (National Association for Interpretation) is the property of National Association for Interpretation and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

On the Wind » News

A teacher and student review writing in Cherokee at the language immersion school in Tahlequah, Oklahoma.

In Congress, a Tribal Language

Bill Languishes WITH FEWER NATIVE SPEAKERS

AT EACH PASSING GENERATION,

A PROPOSED $ 5 MILLIO N GRANT

P R O G R A M C O U L D BOLSTER EFFORTS

TO SAVE IND IG EN O U S LANGUAGES

BY INCREASING NATIVE STUDENT

ACHIEVEMENT BY ITS FUTURE IS

UNCERTAIN IN THE NEW CONGRESS,

BY MALLORY BLACK (NAVAJO)

EACH M O R N IN G , MEDA N IX’S THIRD GRADE CLASS sings songs in Cherokee before the school day begins, setting the tone for the day at the Cherokee Immersion Charter School.

By the end of the school year, the students will be able to carry on con­ versations in Cherokee, Nix says, and by sixth grade, they will be fluent.

“I don’t know what they went through that morning before they came to school,” says Nix, a certified Cherokee speaker, “but I do know that once we sing, it just puts these kids in a better mood to learn.”

W ith 120 students in pre-kindergarten to eighth grade, the school in Tahlequah, Oklahoma, is key to restoring the number of fluent Cherokee speakers, which has dropped to roughly 3,000, says Chuck Hoskin Jr., Cherokee Nation Secretary of State.

One of the school administrator’s and tribal leaders’ biggest goals is to expand the program to include a high school curriculum.

The school is supported by a mix of state and tribal funds and follows grade level Oklahoma state standard curriculum.

“W hat we’re needing is resources,” says Chuck Hoskin Jr., Cherokee Nation Secretary of State. “We’re up against the same challenge that all Indigenous tribes and people are facing around the world, which is we’re losing our language.”

The opportunity for a Cherokee immersion high school could come with a proposed bill that would establish a $5 million federal grant pro­ gram next year to support tribal language immersion schools and nonprof­ its in Indian Country. U.S. Sen. Jon Tester, a Democrat from Montana who is the outgoing Senate Indian Affairs Committee Chairman, says the bill aims to reduce unemployment and improve Native student education.

But its prospects are uncertain in the new Congress. “The goals are to improve academic performance and lower the

dropout rate for Native American kids, and that’s done pretty effectively

12 NATIVE PEOPLES

CO UR

TE SY

C HE

RO KE

E NA

TI O

N O

F O

KL AH

O M

A.

with language because it connects people back up with their culture,” Tester says.

According to the United Nations, 74 Native American languages are on track to disappear within the next decade. By 2050, only 20 of those languages will be spoken to some degree.

Research shows fewer children can speak their Native tongue with each passing generation. The U.S. Census Bureau reports only one in 10 Native American youth ages of 5 to 17 speak their Native language at home, compared with one in five people aged 65 and older.

It is unknown how many tribal immersion schools exist in the U.S. since most begin as small programs within the tribe and have a quick turnover rate. The Indigenous Languages Institute in Santa Fe, New Mexico is working to have a complete list of Native immersion schools by the end of 2015.

The Cherokee Immersion Charter School opened its doors in 2003, and students who were among the first to be immersed in the language are now freshman at nearby Sequoyah High School.

School officials say more federal resources could also help support two other major needs: salaries for teachers and classroom assistant and gen­ eral school operations. But approval of the bill would require the U.S. Department of Education to redistribute existing education funds.

Still, Ahniwake Rose, a member of the Cherokee Nation and execu­ tive director of the National Indian Education Association, says funding for immersion schools is a top priority voiced by many tribal leaders.

“Tribes are able to gather a certain amount of money, reach founda­ tions and other funding sources to start, but without sustainability, they close,” says Rose, who worked with Tester’s office to draft the bill. “This bill will allow our immersion programs to stay open, and what’s more important is that the longevity will allow us to have the data to show that these programs are working.”

No data exists yet to show increased academic performance at the Cherokee immersion school, but Principal Holly Davis says they’re working on it.

Last year the school translated the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS), a comprehensive academic achievement test, into Cherokee for the first time. However administrators quickly realized the Cherokee test proved more difficult for students than the English version.

“It’s new and fresh for us, and we know we have a long way to go with that test, but we’ve got a starting point on it,” Davis says. “We’ve got to figure that out.” She admits testing is likely be the school’s biggest chal­ lenge since grantees would be required to submit annual reports each year.

School officials say most parents support the immersion program because they want to instill the language in their children for future gen­ erations. Davis says whether more federal support becomes available, the immersion school will continue to serve as an option for families who are otherwise limited.

“No one has to come to immersion,” Davis says, “but there are parents who choose to make language an important aspect of their home and their child’s life.”

Mallory Black (Navajo) is a freelance writer who lives in San Diego, Cali­ fornia. She recently interned with W B E Z Chicago Public Radio and holds a master o f journalism from the M edill School o f Journalism a t Northwestern University. She has reported in Chicago an d Washington, DC. Connect with her on Twitter: @mblack47.

A C C O R D IN G TO THE UNITED

NATIONS, 7 4 NATIVE A M E R IC A N

LANG UAG ES ARE O N TRACK

TO DISAPPEAR WITHIN THE NEXT

DEC ADE, BY 2 0 5 0 , ONLY 2 0

O F THOSE LANG UAG ES WILL BE

SPOKEN TO SO M E DEGREE.

A la s k a N a tiv e s S e e Progress in L a n g u a g e P reserv a tio n , V o tin g Rights

IN ALASKA, RECENT MOVES AT THE STATE LEVEL a n d in the courts have recognized the im po rta n ce o f Native languages a n d put them o n election ballots.

Last fall, then-Gov. Sean Parnell signed off on legislation to rec­ ognize 20 Alaska Native languages as official languages o f the state, including Inupiaq, Siberian Yupik, Central Alaskan Yup'ik, Alutiiq, Unangax, Dena'ina, Deg Xinag, Holikachuk, Koyukon, Upper Kuskokwim, Gwich'in, Tanana, Upper Tanana, Tanacross, Han, Ahtna, Eyak, Tlingif, Haida, a n d Tsimshian, in addition to English, However English will remain as the la n g u a g e for official business in Aaska. In Aaska. nearly 20 percent o f the p o p u la ­ tion identifies as American Indian a n d Aaska Native, a cco rd in g to th e U.S, Census,

Alaska state election officials are now required to translate c a n d id a te summaries, voting information a n d materials into Gwich'in a n d Yup'ik. In September, a federal ju d g e in Anchor­ a g e found the state had failed to provide Gwich'in or Yup'ik speakers translations o f voting information equivalent to w hat voters receive in English. "The court's decision marks a n im­ portant step towards ensuring that all voters in Aaska have an equal opportunity to exercise their fundam ental right to vote," said attorney James Tucker, who spoke on behalf of the four tribal councils a n d two Alaska Natives who filed the lawsuit, in a release from the Native American Rights Fund.

JAN UAR Y/FEBRU AR Y 2015 13

Copyright of Native Peoples Magazine is the property of Native Peoples Magazine and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Transformative Learning, Tribal Membership and Cultural Restoration A case study of an embedded Native American service-learning project at a research university

In the United States, there are 565 federally recognised Native

American tribal nations, all of which experience a host of

challenges: lack of economic opportunities (Cornell & Kalt 2006;

Lynch & Stretesky 2012; Tighe 2014; Weaver 2012), increased

rates of mental health and substance abuse (Goins et al. 2012;

Gone 2007; Smokowski , Evans, Cotter, & Webber 2014; West

et al. 2012), and continued cultural loss resulting from historic

practices of genocide and legal and social marginalisation (Evans-

Campbell 2008; Gone 2007; Hartmann & Gone 2014; Ramirez

& Hammack 2014; Writer 2001). Unsurprisingly, these negative

experiences also occur within settings of higher education. Native

American students’ educational expectations are lower than those

of other minority groups (Grande 2004; Thompson 2012) and they

experience the lowest college admission rates and the highest rates

of attrition (Kim 2011; McClellan 2005). Taken in totality, the

social and educational statistics are staggering.

In response, the US federal government and institutions

of higher education have established programs, resources and

services for Native American students aimed at improving

retention and preventing attrition. The US TRIO programs, for

example, are federally funded outreach and support programs

that provide under-represented and financially disadvantaged

students with institutionalised educational support. While the

programs are specifically for first-generation, low-income and

disabled students, many of the participants are Native American.

One such TRIO program is Upward Bound, which targets under-

represented students and provides them with support to help them

complete high school and enter a college program (US Department

of Education 2017).

While these programs are helpful in orienting Native

American students during their first years of college life, they do

not address the specific historic or cultural needs of these students,

which are likely to vary by tribal affiliation. Where these programs

do focus on tribal culture, they are pan-Indian in nature. Thus,

they fail to take into account cultural influences resulting from

the world view of the particular tribal nation. A growing body

Brent E Sykes Randall University

Joy Pendley Zermarie Deacon University of Oklahoma

© 2017 by BE Sykes, J Pendley & Z Deacon. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) License (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercial, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.

Citation: Sykes, BE, Pendley, J & Deacon, Z 2017, ‘Transformative learning, tribal membership and cultural restoration: A case study of an embedded Native American service-learning project at a research university’, Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement, vol. 10, pp. 204–228. doi: 10.5130/ijcre. v10i1.5334

Corresponding author: Brent E Sykes; [email protected]

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/ ijcre.v10i1.5334

ISSN 1836-3393 Published by UTS ePRESS http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/ journals/index.php/ijcre/index

Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement

Vol 10 (2017)

205 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

of research illustrates the importance of tribal-specific cultural

support and connection for Native American students to succeed

in college (Grande 2004; Guillory & Wolverton 2008; James,

West & Madrid 2013; Writer 2001). Given that Native American

culture is not homogenous, Fletcher (2010) has challenged tribal

nations to create educational programming based upon their

own epistemological belief systems, as opposed to Westernised

models. It is in this vein that we consider a tribal-initiated service-

learning project as a viable mechanism for linking specific tribal

community needs with academic learning. This case is noteworthy

because it was conceived of and funded by a tribal nation.

PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH We contend that institutions of higher education should respond to

this cultural need by facilitating the adaptation of existing models

of educational resource delivery, namely service-learning, within

Native American communities. Consistent with this view, Benson,

Harkavy & Puckett (2007) argue that it is the moral responsibility

of universities to improve the wellbeing of communities, and

Fehren (2010) considers universities as intermediaries in this

process. Moreover, tribal community strengths (i.e. resources

and needs) should drive the process, and given the unique lived

experiences of each tribal nation, the core values and goals of

tribally directed service-learning projects should vary greatly.

The purpose of this investigation was to examine the

development and implementation of a service-learning project

embedded within a campus-based tribal learning community at

the university. This service-learning project was conceptualised

within the context of a community-based participatory research

(CBPR) collaboration (Figure 1). CBPR involves a partnership that

builds on the knowledge and skills of community members and

researchers in a reciprocal manner to build capacity within the

community. It has also been shown to be an effective strategy

for developing action plans that help communities improve their

health or education system (Adams et al. 2014; Ahari et al. 2012;

Castleden, Morgan & Neimanis 2008).

In this case, the tribal nation sought out researchers at

the university to develop programming and research capacity

within the tribal nation. During this process, service-learning

emerged as a rich means to develop culturally meaningful

learning, and subsequent learning transformation, for all

stakeholders (Tribal Nation undergraduate students and leaders)

involved in the project. The principal research question that

we address in this article is: how did tribal students and leaders

come to understand the educational and cultural significance

of this service-learning project?

206 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

Tribe-University

Collaboration:

Year 1

Tribal Learning

Community: Year 2

(First Semester)

Service-

Learning

Project: Year

2 (Second

Semester)

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Transformative learning theory (Mezirow 2000) serves as the

theoretical framework by which we came to understand the

cultural transformation of tribal members. We assert that service-

learning provided a pathway for Native American tribal members

to collectively experience Indigenous-based transformative

learning. This research advances the service-learning literature by

demonstrating that service-learning is a culturally appropriate,

highly adaptable, non-Westernised option for marginalised groups

to initiate and sustain highly impactful educational experiences.

Transformative learning theory is an adult learning theory

that seeks to understand qualitative changes that may occur across

the life course. It places value on both psychological (individual

differences) and social (belief systems) components of learning

(Mezirow 1991). Habits of mind are the filters by which we process

information and make sense of the world around us. According to

Mezirow (2000), three conditions must be met for a transformation

to occur: a disorienting dilemma, changes in initial frame of

reference, and critical reflection.

Critical reflection is the process by which people make and

ascribe meaning to critical incidents and life events. Perspective

shifts are often the result of disorienting dilemmas, which may

be a singular event such as trauma or an accumulation of

experiences. In the throes of disorientation, individuals must

choose to engage in critical reflection, otherwise transformation

will not occur. If individuals choose to engage in critical reflection,

they may emerge with new perspectives through which they view

Figure 1: Structure of collaboration

207 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

themselves and their surroundings. According to Mezirow (2000),

behavioural and attitudinal changes serve as evidence that

transformational learning has occurred.

A number of transformative learning theorists have

challenged the theory, as originally conceived by Mezirow,

arguing that it places too much emphasis on rationality and fails

to account for context (Clark & Wilson 1991; Taylor 1997). On

this point, Taylor (2008) and Brooks (2001) have considered the

role of constructivism by placing increased emphasis on the role

of culture and its impact on meaning-making. In addition, two

critical transformative learning theorists, Cunningham (1998) and

Lange (2004), have examined transformations in light of Freire’s

(1970) theoretical conception of critical consciousness-raising.

Freire argues that minorities might become marginalised by

the majority and the social structures that represent majoritarian

views. Over time, marginalisation leads to oppression and false

beliefs, which are created by the majority and become internalised

by the minority in question. Overcoming marginalisation involves

the development of a critical consciousness that will not only make

them aware of the structures that limit their community but will

also give them the tools for fighting injustices (Diemer et al. 2016;

Gutierrez 1995). For Cunningham (1998), the transformative

process remains individualised; however, consciousness-raising

may entail a group of people undergoing similar processes. Lange’s

(2004) prime focus, however, is communal action. As she contends

that transformation goes beyond epistemological shifts, her view is

most conducive to tribal identity and membership.

Service-Learning in Native American Communities

Service-learning is a highly effective pedagogical tool that links

community service with classroom learning. In higher education

settings, it is widely employed in both student affairs and course

curricula (Furco 1996; Stewart & Webster 2011). Through well-

designed service-learning projects, students gain a deep sense of

knowledge and a broadened world view, which may result in their

challenging their own epistemological values and beliefs (Blouin &

Perry 2009). Given the history of forced removal and assimilation

of Native American tribal nations in the US, it cannot be assumed

that tribal members will have access to and knowledge of their

histories, family narratives, culture and traditions.

Indigenous service-learning involves tribal communities

placing emphasis on their own unique values and world view

(Guffey 1997; Roche et al. 2007) and from their tribal point of

view (Lipka 1991; Semken 2005; Steinman 2011). This is especially

salient as institutionalised forms of education may suppress Native

American world views through the promotion of Westernised or

colonised world views (Sykes 2014). In contrast, tribal service-

learning may provide a pedagogical opportunity for tribal

values and traditions to drive learning by providing structured

208 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

opportunities for increased awareness of cultural traditions,

belonging and civic responsibility that are commensurate with the

values of Indigenous communities (Hall 1991; Steinman 2011).

METHODOLOGY In this section, we discuss why we adopted CBPR as our orientation

towards the research and then describe our thinking behind the

case study approach we embraced after considerable consideration.

In the section that follows we discuss our research positionality

and philosophical orientation as these relate to the investigation.

CBPR as an Orientation

CBPR is an approach or orientation that links community

members and researchers as partners in the research process.

CBPR emphasises the importance of cultural safety and requires

a significant investment of time and dedication from all parties,

as well as ongoing relationship building (Minkler 2005). In

CBPR, the community drives the research process, including

the methods used for investigation, the interpretation of data

and the application of results (Metzler et al. 2003). CBPR is of

particular relevance in Native American communities because

the communities themselves may question Westernised education

models’ devaluation of Indigenous knowledge (Grande 2004).

Historically, Native American communities have been wary of

research as it promotes objective ways of knowing and minimises

particular tribal world views and belief systems (Scheurich &

Young 1997; Smith 1999).

Case Study

Case study is a widely accepted research methodology that places

value on the uniqueness of a phenomenon, event or experience

(Stake 1995; Yin 2009). Stake (1995) provides a three-fold typology

of case study research: instrumental, collective, and intrinsic.

Instrumental case studies advance a field of study, collective case

studies involve a grouping of cases, and intrinsic case studies are

guided by a comprehensive understanding of a case. In the latter,

the case may initially be puzzling, but themes emerge through

analysis. Initially, we focused on the significance of the tribal

learning community; however, through reflexivity and analysis,

we came to appreciate service-learning as the central force in this

intrinsic case.

EMERGENT DESIGN As indicated in Figure 1, this project spanned two years. Through

prolonged exposure and an emergent design, we came to

understand the case through various theoretical lenses. Case study

researcher Bob Stake (1995) proposes that viewing a phenomenon

from multiple perspectives ultimately enhances researcher

understanding. Initially, we understood this project through the

lens of historical trauma, which is the intergenerational transfer of

systemic trauma (Brave Heart & DeBruyn 1998). Decolonisation

literature (Gone 2008; Kirmayer, Gone & Moses 2014) challenged

209 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

us to become critical of a narrow definition of historical trauma,

as it could further frame the experiences of Native Americans

according to Westernised perspectives (Fletcher 2013).

Through immersion in the case, we came to appreciate

the educational impacts of the service-learning project, especially

given undergraduate students’ testing of tribal identities and

tribal leaders reflecting upon prior conceptions of citizenship.

Charmaz, Denzin & Lincoln (2003) view sensitisation as the

process by which researchers’ senses become attuned to

underlying ideas and concepts. In effect, we became sensitised

to transformations occurring in real time and, ultimately, we came

to understand the case through the lens of transformative learning

theory. Thus, language, tone and analysis reflect renewal. In our

view, this is culturally appropriate as the tribal nation

views education and cultural connections as central values.

As CBPR researchers, we recognise the importance of criticality

in Indigenous research; thus, in the implications of this research,

we consider the possible intersection of transformative service-

learning and decolonisation literature.

Participants

Participants included tribal students involved in the service-

learning project embedded within the learning community (n=24)

and tribal leaders (n= 6).

Sources of Data

As case study research seeks to gain a robust understanding of

a phenomenon, researchers should include two or more sources

of data (Yin 2009). In this case, data came from three broad

sources: direct observations of participants, documents (emails,

news articles and a radio show transcript), and participant

observation and researcher field notes. Sources of data were coded

and categorised independently by all three researchers, thereby

establishing increased credibility. Additionally, triangulation

occurred through cross-analysis between data sources. Data

analysis did not begin until the conclusion of the research team’s

engagement with the partnership, thereby minimising conflicts of

interest and research bias.

Researcher Positionality

Researchers BS and JP worked directly with the learning community

students, keeping field notes. Researcher ZD conducted an

evaluation of the program, which included participants’ interviews

and survey completion. Consistent with CBPR principles, the first

author, BS, is a tribal member and was employed contractually by

the tribal nation to facilitate the learning community and service-

learning project. JP (an anthropologist) represented the university

in the partnership and ZD (a community psychologist) conducted

a first-year process evaluation of the learning community and

subsequent service-learning project.

JP began working with the tribal nation in 2009 to develop

a research program and from that work the idea of developing

210 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

a learning community emerged. BS and ZD began to work with

the tribal nation in 2010. The first learning community began

during the 2010–2011 academic year and continues to this day.

Researchers still meet periodically with tribal leaders to discuss the

objectives of the learning community, including current iterations

of service-learning projects. The tribal nation chose to be de-

identified because it continues to be engaged in partnership with

researchers and the university.

THE RESEARCH CONTEXT As case study research is highly contextualised, it is imperative to

note the setting in which this research occurred. In this section, we

highlight central features of the two institutions represented in this

research: the Native American tribal nation and the university.

The University

The university is the only ‘very high research activity’ higher

education institution in the state, as identified by the Carnegie

Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. It is also

the largest in the state, with a total undergraduate enrolment

of approximately 30,000, which includes a Native American

enrolment of over 1000. It provides a host of academic and

social support services for under-represented and first-generation

students. Geographically, the university is outside the boundaries

of the collaborative tribal nation jurisdiction.

The Tribal Nation

In the United States, ‘Indian Country’ represents land that has been

placed in a federal trust as the direct result of signed treaties (Baird

& Goble 2008; Davis 2010; Newton 1984; Schneider 2010; Warren

2012). While some trusts are noted as reservations, in which tribal

nations have sole ownership of the land, the majority of trust land

in the US is allotted land. In this latter form, tribal sovereignty

exists provided it is in conjunction with federal laws, and non-

Indians can own property or businesses and operate on the

land. The tribal nation in this case was guaranteed allotted land

(totalling over 18 000 kilometres (7000 square miles) in treaties.

In terms of population size, the tribal nation is quite large as it

falls within the top 10 per cent of membership of all 565 federally

recognised tribal nations. It has a three-tier system of government

similar to the US government (executive, judiciary, legislative).

Historically, the tribal nation was located in what is now

the south-east United States, which resulted in early contact with

Europeans and the mixing of bloodlines. As a result, many tribal

members are phenotypically light-skinned. Forced removal to

Indian Territory (predominantly the state of Oklahoma) resulted in

land allotments, which was a systematic effort to break communal

identity and accelerate assimilation (Davidson 2011; Dippel 2014;

Fletcher 2013; Foreman 1974; Thornton 1997). Today, the effects

of assimilation are evident across Indian Country, as Native

Americans have lost much of their language, rituals and other

forms of culture.

211 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

For this tribal nation, membership was legally defined by

the US federal government through the Dawes Treaty (1897–1934).

Thus, tribal members are dispersed across a wide geographic

area and have varying degrees of contact with other tribal

members. Moreover, some tribal members (including one-third

of the participants in this study) reside outside these boundaries

altogether. Cultural loss, then, has had significant implications for

the forming of existing tribal world views, as many present-day

tribal members have lost contact with their cultural traditions.

Today, the tribal nation invests heavily in the physical,

mental and social wellbeing of its tribal members through varied

services and programs. As a result of a recent increase in financial

resources, the tribal nation is actively developing educational

initiatives and programs to improve the quality of life and

wellbeing of tribal members, including providing significant higher

education scholarships for all eligible members. The tribal nation

has extensive experience in creating a host of PK–12 educational

programs (Head Start, performing and visual arts academies,

summer programs, mentoring), but has only recently begun to

develop programming for higher education.

PROJECT NARRATIVE: SERVICE-LEARNING TRANSFORMING NATIVE AMERICAN LEARNING This section serves two purposes. First, it discusses the

chronological progression of the case by providing detail on the

learning community and an overview of critical steps in the

service-learning project (Figure 2). Second, it provides a framework

for analysis.

Year One: Collaboration Begins

The larger CBPR collaboration within which this study is framed

began when the tribal nation requested to collaborate with the

university. This relationship focused on developing a culturally

appropriate health-care centre for the tribal nation. The second

and third authors of this article were asked to work with tribal

leaders to develop culturally appropriate health-care programs for

the tribal nation’s department of family services. The researchers

worked with tribal health providers to develop the ‘Strong Family

Survey’ – a brief assets assessment designed to better understand

how tribal members defined a strong tribal family.

The tribal nation desired to reach out to tribal students at

the university. While approximately 180 tribal members attended

Figure 2: Progression of collaboration

Year 1 — Collaboration Begins — Strong Family Survey 1

Year 3 — Tribal Service Learning I — Presentation to Governor — Tribal Service Learning II

Year 2 — Learning community — NAS Course — Service-Learning Project; Strong- Family Survey 2 — Workshops I & II — Administration

212 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

the university and received tribal scholarships, there were no

tribal-specific programs for students. A faculty member suggested a

learning community as a means to connect with students, provide

them with supports to assist them to be successful at university and

possibly increase their connection to the tribal nation. A learning

community is a cohort model that creates a peer-orientated

community, where members come together to participate in

educational or cultural activities that increase their connectedness

within a larger institution (Tinto 2003). In terms of first-year

college experiences, George Kuh (2008) cites both learning

communities and service-learning as high impact practices for

first-year college students.

Year Two: Learning Community and Service-Learning

The three authors developed a learning community that offered

students access to academic support, group-based social events,

opportunities for professional development with tribal members,

and cultural programming designed to connect them to their

tribal identity. Upon implementation, we discovered that many

of our students were knowledgeable about the process of higher

education. Even first-generation students quickly accessed existing

university resources designed for early academic intervention and

social support, thereby rendering the academic aspects of the

learning community redundant. However, in contrast, the majority

of students had limited exposure to tribal culture and traditions.

Learning Community programming was thus shifted to promote

students’ need for high-impact cultural experiences. Vaughan

(2002) notes the significance of collaborative environments for

first-generation and under-represented groups, as it leads to joint

identity development.

Participation in the learning community was voluntary

and initially open to tribal freshmen at the university. Thus, tribal

students in the project were self-selected. Forty tribal freshmen

were invited to participate via letters, letters to parents, emails

and phone. Ultimately, 24 students participated. Given the unique

lived history of the tribal nation (some tribal members live outside

tribal boundaries and in some cases out of the state), several of the

students had not previously had the opportunity to participate in

tribal activities or events.

Learning community activities took place on a bi-weekly

basis on and off campus. These consisted of social and cultural

activities such as the creation of cultural artefacts, community

service events and field trips to tribal events. Interactive cultural

events such as language classes and dance troupe demonstrations

were included with experiential education in mind. For some of

the students, this was the first time they were exposed to tribal

language and dance. These activities were extracurricular,

which became a problem as students became more involved on

campus and had decreased time for communal activities. We

therefore sought an institutional mechanism to allow for learning

community activities to become part of their accredited coursework.

213 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

In response to this emergent need, the authors approached

the Native American Studies (NAS) program at the university to

modify one of its four sections of ‘Introduction to NAS’ for our

students. They agreed, and the new course included an emphasis

on this tribal nation’s history and culture. In this class, the

learning community participants were able to complete a research

project on their tribal culture. This class helped deepen tribal

knowledge for these students.

During this time, the authors met monthly with the

executive committee in charge of the collaboration. Tribal leaders

would learn about the progress of the learning community

activities and we would all brainstorm about next steps. Tribal

leaders desired an experiential learning activity to link new-found

cultural knowledge and advance the importance of tribal service.

Incidentally, the timing of the NAS course coincided with the

second iteration of a tribal survey, which was a component of the

larger collaborative partnership. We, the researchers, suggested

that students could play a pivotal service role in developing a new

version of the survey, which sought to assess ‘What is a Strong

Tribal Family’. Tribal leaders agreed, as this was consistent with

goals of the course and learning community. From correspondence

between an author and a tribal professional:

The goal of this project is to create and validate a survey that can be

taken to other meeting points, listening conferences, gatherings, etc.

to develop a broader understanding of strong families and how the

[tribal nation] can provide support for those families...Second, this

project is a pilot for service learning with the [Learning Community]

students. Their participation in the project will be both an

educational process and a service project for the nation. Our goal is

that they will come away from the project with a greater appreciation

of the helping fields and a great appreciation of the [tribal nation]

as a cultural heritage and an institution.

Thus, at the behest of the tribal nation, the authors planned

a two-part workshop over the course of two days. Part I provided

a brief orientation to CBPR, an overview of survey methods and

a seminar discussion on historic trauma. During part II of the

workshop, students worked together to construct the second-year

Strong Family Survey. Students were challenged to conceptualise

their own feelings of tribal identity and cultural loss, and to

understand the impact of historic trauma and their family

history. They learned to critique much of the history they had

been taught in state schools. For instance, there was a prolonged,

critical discussion on the US boarding school movement as a

means to not only assimilate Native American youth but also

annihilate tribal language. More importantly, the students came

to understand the significance of cultural loss. In the process, they

experienced solidarity, which is consistent with Freiean approaches

to consciousness raising (Diemer et al. 2016).

Based upon their physical characteristics and lived

experiences, students developed a question on phenotype for the

214 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

survey. This was potentially problematic given the sociopolitical

issues of blood quantum and tribal membership (Demallie

2009; Green 2007; TallBear 2003; Villazor 2008). After the

workshop, researchers submitted a completed survey to the tribal

Institutional Review Board (IRB) on behalf of the students. The IRB

considered striking out the question on phenotype. The fledgling

tribal members (students), however, responded by reiterating the

significance of determining if phenotype was an important aspect

of a strong tribal family. The IRB allowed the question to remain.

The tribal leaders suggested the annual Children’s Fair as

the site for data collection. There, various service departments

within the tribal nation set up booths to provide educational

and interactive activities for families, including games. Thus, the

atmosphere was geared towards children and family friendly.

There was a host of traditional exhibitions on areas such as

storytelling, dance and language.

When we arrived, the students were visibly nervous. Student-

constructed surveys in hand, we crossed the red dirt arena. We

brought university t-shirts as an incentive for completing surveys,

which drew strong interest. We administered all one hundred

surveys during the first hour. This positive response helped the

students to feel more comfortable. Children, many of them would-

be first generation students themselves, showered the learning

community students with questions about what college was like.

The students eagerly responded to questions and encouraged

them to do well in school so they could attend college too. Tribal

parents smiled. The tribal dance troupe, consisting of mostly elders,

recognised our students from learning community activities and

invited them to join in.

The group returned to the survey booth and, unexpectedly,

the tribal executive committee approached, meeting the students

for the first time. Up to this point, the committee had been

responsible for administrative duties, but never had they interacted

with participants. We facilitated the interaction by introducing

students to the director and other tribal leaders. The conversation

was lively. Leaders quizzed the students on their majors, previous

experiences with the tribal nation, and most importantly their

views on the service-learning project and learning community.

Students conveyed their shared emotional experiences and newly

formed tribal identities. At that moment, the tribal president (i.e.

Governor) emerged. He too expressed sincere appreciation for the

students making time to be involved in the project; the committee

had been providing him with reports. The students were literally

awestruck. They were astounded that tribal leaders were thanking

them. In a tribal nation of 30,000 plus members, this was a

distinct honour. The students quickly flipped the script by profusely

thanking the tribal Governor and professionals for this opportunity

to serve the tribal nation.

The long van ride back to campus provided the students

an opportunity to reflect on the academic year. It felt like a

commencement celebration. Students’ remarks on being Native

215 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

American were markedly different from what they were just

nine months ago at the beginning of the semester. Gone was

the mention of blood quantum, replaced with comments such

as ‘I wonder … who [our] common ancestors are?’ ‘What are

we [students] going to do next?’ and ‘I can’t believe the Tribal

Governor thanked us’. Collectively, students reflected upon the

most embarrassing and fun moments of the past year. And in the

process they recounted how they had grown from being nervous

about not knowing their tribal history to being eager to learn more.

Year Two and Beyond

Initial funding plans for the learning community and the

subsequent service-learning project were uncertain; however, based

upon an independent evaluation, the tribal nation extended both.

In order to continue NAS involvement in the project (making the

project co-curricular), the Executive Committee made a remarkable

decision to devote resources to the program in the form of a

financial donation towards the faculty member’s contract and

allocation of tribal staff to serve as cultural experts for the course.

In effect, this institutionalised the service-learning project by

creating an upper-division course titled ‘Tribal Service-Learning’.

Thus, this case illustrates Fletcher’s (2010) assertion that tribal

nations should exert their own sovereignty and create their own

novel programming.

The new tribal service-learning course differed from the

original in a few key ways. First, it was open to university students

of all tribal nations. Second, with the guidance of an instructor,

students examined existing tribal programs and services,

conducted an informal needs analysis and, with the assistance

of cultural experts, were tasked with developing a curriculum

proposal. Ultimately, participants created ‘One Heart, One Beat’,

an experiential program designed to highlight the importance of

social dance and culture. For this tribal nation and many others

that experienced severe cultural loss, social dance is one of the

few practices that has remained intact; thus, it has strong cultural

significance (Axtmann 2001; Murphy 2007; Wilson & Boatright

2011). Tribal leaders gathered for the student presentation of their

final project. Given the service-learning project results at the

Children’s Fair, tribal leaders had come to have high expectations of

the participants. The presentation surpassed them. From field notes:

‘They look so professional,’ a tribal administrator confided to me

[researcher]. I smiled, knowing she was in for a treat. The lights

dimmed and we watched the student-created video ‘One Heart,

One Beat’, which detailed an eight-week social dance program.

The program was inter-generational, connecting tribal elders as

instructors, students as facilitators, and youth as participants. A

student explained, ‘We are not the experts on social dance and

feel like the kids [adolescence] would respond better to an elder

216 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

who commands more respect. We can identify with them [the

adolescents], so we see our role as bridging the gap between young

and old.’

As evidence of their excitement, tribal leaders arranged for

the distinction of having students present their work to the Tribal

Governor and his executive cabinet.

On presentation day to the Governor and his cabinet,

the students were visibly nervous, yet excited to showcase the

passion they had poured into their work. At the conclusion of the

presentation, tribal leaders provided a standing ovation and the

students beamed with pride. On the spot, the Governor asked the

students to implement the project during the upcoming summer.

Thus, the course ‘Tribal Service-Learning II’ was created for the

summer semester and students prepared a working budget and

implemented the program.

ANALYSIS In this section, we analyse the case through transformative

learning theory. In doing so, we contend that service-learning

became a mechanism to promote cultural restoration for this

Native American community. Kitchenham’s (2008) summative

assessment of Mezirow’s perspective of transformative learning

serves as the basis of the analysis (Table 1). With this as our

theoretical framework, we assess stakeholder experiences as

evidence of transformation (phases categorised by case events in

parentheses). Lastly, we consider institutionalisation as evidence of

organisational transformation.

Phase Transformative learning action

Service-learning activity

Participant quotes as evidence

NA Previous frame of reference

NA (previous views). ‘I had no tribal influences besides mail and financial support… it was not a constant connection’ (Lance 2009).

1 Disorienting dilemma Participants enroll in learning community and ‘Introduction to NAS’ and are confronted with tribal ways of knowing and new cultural experiences.

‘How much are you?’ (referring to blood quantum)

2 Self-examination of feelings of guilt or shame

Workshop I: Participants share oral family histories including guilt and shame over lack of tribal genealogy and culture. Students share stories about suppressed culture.

‘I didn’t know what it meant to be a member of the tribe.’

Table 1: ‘Ten Phases of Transformative Learning & Corresponding Service- Learning Activity’, adapted from Kitchenham (2008)

217 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

3 Critical assessment of epistemic, sociocultural, or psychic assumptions

Workshop I: Participants come to understand that their lack of knowledge is not their fault nor is it the fault of their parents or grandparents, but a product of forced cultural assimilation, i.e. historical trauma.

‘We have our own dress and language….there is more to our tribe, not all Indians are the same’ (Lance 2009).

4 Recognition that one’s discontent and the transfor-mation process is shared; others have negotiated a similar change

Participants experience a collective ‘aha’ moment, in recognising similarities across their stories. Instructor- led discussion on the cultural genocidal practices of land allotment to break communal ties and boarding schools as a means to extinguish language broaden perspectives.

‘We’ve become good friends….it’s amazing to know you have that connection; it helps you realize they are there and you are part of a bigger family’ (Lance 2009).

5 Exploration of options for new roles, relationships and actions

Participants question their role in promoting cultural knowledge and awareness through their responsibility for constructing the survey for the tribal nation’s Strong Family research project.

‘My mom said her parents didn’t want her speaking our language because teachers would punish her.’

6 Planning of a course of action

Workshop II: Participants tasked with developing survey.

Not applicable because this is an action.

7 Acquisition of knowledge and skills for implementation

Workshop II: Overview of survey methods including question development.

Not applicable because this is an action.

8 Provisional trying of new roles

Administration: Participants experience ‘being’ community members by attending Children’s Fair, interacting with tribal members and meeting tribal professionals including Governor.

‘It is really interesting; it’s nice to know where you are from, and to have a cultural identity’ (Lance 2009).

9 Building of competence and self-confidence in new roles and relationships

Participants’ reflections on identity and consideration of how they can contribute to the tribal nation.

‘I learned about culture and was able to participate with people from the tribe; all of us are looking for ways to stay active; we don’t want to give it up. It has been a successful pilot run’ (Lance 2009).

218 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

10 A reintegration into one’s life on the basis of conditions dictated by one’s perspective

Year Two and Beyond: Executive Committee continues funding for learning community, participants present to Tribal Governor, tribal nation invests in service- learning project with NAS, participants enrol in Tribal Service- Learning I & II.

‘Through helping us we can help others later; the goal of the 8-week program is foster a network of support …. and to provide the kids a rich, deep cultural experience so they will feel more connected with their culture’ (Lance 2009).

The Learning Community (Laying the Groundwork)

In our view, it is important to note the role of the learning

community, especially cultural activities in creating connection

among participants. Moreover, given the cultural focus of the case,

we consider communal experiences as foundational for collective

transformative learning to occur. Curriculum and cultural

programming were critical, as they challenged participants’ habits

of mind. A student’s quote that exemplifies this process are: ‘I

didn’t know what to expect. I grew up in Dallas and the only other

[tribal] people I ever met were my cousins.…we’ve became good

friends, it’s amazing how we all have that connection’ (Lance

2009). This student felt that the learning community had given

her an opportunity to make connections to other tribal members.

Service-Learning Workshop Part I: Phases 1–4

According to Mezirow (2000), a disorienting dilemma may be

the result of a single traumatic experience or an accumulation

of several incidents. In this case, we assert that the communal

discourse in Part I of the Service-Learning Workshop met the

definition of the latter. This discourse propelled students into

dilemmas. The Executive Committee decided that the Children’s

Fair survey would be an appropriate project for the learning

community students to fulfil their service-learning project. Thus,

the curriculum of Workshop I was deliberately constructed with an

orientation to the Strong Family Survey, and it provided a forum

where participants could share family narratives and reflect on

their significance.

An important feature of this discourse is that participants

came to realise that their conceptions of identity were not unique

to them, but shared among others. Due to forced relocation,

breaking of communal ties and cultural assimilation, there is

historical and cultural loss among many Native Americans

(Evans-Campbell 2008). A by-product of this is an incomplete

and fractured understanding of cultural practices and language.

Through prompts, we asked the students to talk about their

personal and familial experiences and knowledge of their tribal

nation. It was in the telling of these stories that they began

to express discomfort with their histories, thereby potentially

amplifying emotional effects.

219 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

Gradually, participants began to display discontent and

agitation as they shared these stories, which may speak to an

individual’s recognition that one’s discontent and the process

of transformation are shared, and that others have negotiated

a similar change (Kitchenham 2008). Indeed, the emotional

and shared feature of this socially constructed experience seems

to have magnified meaning making. Jointly, students came to

identify and define what constituted a tribal world view for them.

Examples include ‘My mom said her parents didn’t want her

speaking our language because teachers would punish them’

and ‘My grandmother told me the same thing’. Due to the strong

rapport cultivated in the learning community, it is likely they felt

safe in investigating their Indigenous identities by dredging up oral

family histories.

Participants’ willingness to engage in this difficult discussion

challenged deeper underlying assumptions of the world. While

these instances regarding language echo that very first learning

community discussion on blood quantum and phenotype, they

now understood that their plight of identity may not be so different

from that of previous generations. For instance, when discussing

the cultural loss of language, one participant noted, ‘I think my

great grandmother was in a boarding school’, which is evidence

of how the loss of valuable family histories can potentially lead to

an insecure cultural identity.

Service-Learning Workshop Part II: Phases 5–7

This case illustrates that service-learning can play a crucial role

in promoting transformative learning because it provides

curricular pathways for students to test new roles and relationships

and formulate action. The project became a conduit for collective

agency, which is regarded as the efficacious belief of the group

in achieving a similar goal (Goddard, Hoy & Hoy 2004). Due to

collective transformations occurring as a result of disorientating

dilemmas, two student characteristics that had recently served as

a limitation to students’ development (lack of cultural knowledge

and insecurity of blood quantum) became assets. The testing

and exploration of these new-found cultural identities were

strengthened as students developed the survey designed to help

determine ‘What is a strong tribal family?’

From a CBPR perspective, the creation of the survey radically

changed social dynamics by empowering students. Evidence of

critical reflection can be found in their collective reflection upon

their own lived experiences. This was particularly apparent in

the ways that the two surveys differed. The first Children’s

Fair survey was faculty-driven, thus the questions were from

a Westernised perspective. For example, statements like, ‘A

family that maintains traditions and older ways of doing things’

(traditional) and ‘A family that consists only of immediate family

members, a nuclear family (e.g., only parents and children)’

(Western) were both listed. When the students developed the

second survey, it looked very different.

220 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

The student or tribal-driven survey was more focused on

collective history and relationships. For example, the students

developed several questions about history, such as ‘strong

families pass on family history, learn from their elders, participate

in ceremonies and pass on values through storytelling’.

The students were also interested in the relationship between

strong families and their connection to the tribal nation.

Sample questions included: strong families ‘see each other often’

and ‘do activities together’.

Given their ongoing transformation, students created

questions regarding cultural identity and phenotype, which drew

ire from the tribal nation IRB. Upon reviewing the survey items,

the IRB flagged a few of these items and requested revisions.

Students agreed to change every item that the IRB had flagged,

except for the phenotype question, as they believed it represented a

significant issue for tribal individuals and families. Tribal leaders

and the IRB finally agreed to the question. The inclusion of this

sensitive item is evidence of students becoming empowered to

play a role in tribal relations, as well as tribal leaders’ expanded

notions of tribal membership. Ultimately, having tribal members

– the students – develop the survey proved to intensify the

CBPR effects of the collaboration. This second survey serves as

evidence of the students reflecting upon their family histories and

connection to the tribal nation.

Service-Learning Implementation – The Children’s Fair:

Phases 8–9

Survey development provided students with a means to give back

to the tribal nation by trying on the role of citizen. From this

view, approval from the IRB and tribal leaders served as a means

of acceptance and validation. While the workshop experiences

facilitated a collective realisation that they had something of value

to contribute to the tribal nation, implementation of the survey at

the Children’s Fair heightened this sense of civic responsibility and

provided an opportunity for students to interact with tribal youth,

elders and leaders. These interactions reinforced their cultural

identities and validated their perception that they could contribute

to the tribal nation in a beneficial way. One student noted: ‘I

learned about culture and was able to participate with people

from the tribe’. And, another: ‘All of us are looking for ways to stay

active; we don’t want to give it up. It has been a successful pilot

run.’ Thus, developing the survey and implanting it as a service-

learning project helped solidify their transformation from students

to tribal members.

The service-learning project served to raise the collective

consciousness of tribal students, thereby fostering epistemological

shifts in perspectives necessary for transformative learning. This

process of critical reflection resulted in deep cultural connection

and subsequent transformations. Consistent with transformative

learning theory, Martin (2007) weighs the importance of culture,

identity and education. She contends that identity is contextual,

221 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

may take on multiple dimensions and is heavily influenced by

culture. This can be seen in the discussion on the way home from

the community fair, as students actively reflected on tribal culture,

learning and identity.

Year Two and Beyond: Phase 10

As this research is embedded within a larger partnership, in this

section we consider three additional forms of evidence that service-

learning provided a pathway towards cultural restoration in this

case. This approach is consistent with transformative learning

theory as it focuses on psychological, attitudinal and behavioural

facets of change (Mezirow 2000). Thus, it is necessary to look

beyond the service-learning project to seek behavioural evidence of

transformation.

First, at the conclusion of the service-learning project,

students volunteered to become peer mentors and completed

two three-credit hour courses (each three-hour course is one

semester worth of credit) to develop a program for tribal youth.

As they continued coursework and career preparation, they were

fully committed to integrating their new identities with their

former sense of selves. Martin (2007) refers to this process as ‘gift

recirculation’. For her, the linkage of identity and education creates

powerful experiences, and being so moved, individuals yearn to

share them with others.

Over the course of one short academic year, many students

incurred rapid transformations. Initially, a common shared feature

among them was that they perceived little opportunity to give

back to the tribal nation. Recirculating the gift of cultural identity

through collective action (through Service-Learning I & II courses,

presentation to the Tribal Governor and being relied upon to

implement an eight-week summer program) became a powerful

force for solidifying transformations.

Second, the development and implementation of One Heart,

One Beat provided the students with an opportunity to articulate

their vision of a remedy for intergenerational cultural loss.

Engaging in social dance was an emotional experience, which they

wished to share with other tribal adolescents. Viewing themselves

as facilitators and tribal elders as teachers suggests an ontological

shift from Westernised individualised education towards

communal education. This echoes the research on transformative

and restorative learning by Lange (2004). Rendering elders as

teachers is consistent with tribal ontological beliefs in cultural

renewal and in preserving Indigenous ways of knowing.

Third, the service-learning project unexpectedly galvanised

all stakeholders to continue collaborative work: both the tribal

nation and the university institutionalised components of the

project across multiple years. Specifically, the learning community

is now in its fifth year and has expanded to two additional higher

education institutions in the state. The Native American Studies

program at the university extended the permanent service-learning

course, and it remains opens to all students, not just this tribal

222 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

nation. Institutionalisation is regarded as evidence of sustainability

in higher education environments (Yarime et al. 2012). In addition,

as Mezirow (2000) and others consider behavioural change

as evidence of transformation, we highlight the importance of

organisational institutionalisation and consider it further evidence

of cultural transformation. Finally, service-learning has also

become an institutionalised practice for the tribal nation, as it

remains nested within the learning community model.

CONCLUSION This case has significant value for Indigenous nations seeking

to exert sovereignty as well as other communities that, through

oppression, have experienced marginalisation, especially in

educational settings. We contend that service-learning is a

significant mechanism whereby disenfranchised groups can

advance their own values, as well as notions of communal

education and tribal membership, in higher educational

settings and beyond. For Indigenous communities, in particular,

it is important to underscore that service-learning can be

culturally appropriate if it places value on non-Westernised

epistemology and values, and the lived history of specific tribal

nations (or communities).

As discussed in this case, tribal nation community needs

(and thus service-learning projects) will vary based upon

a community’s strengths and challenges. For example, this

tribal nation has exerted its sovereignty by developing a strong

infrastructure and extensive resources; however, the challenges of

developing an educational model appropriate for higher education

and shepherding tribal identity tacitly guided the evolution of

this service-learning project. Thus, for this tribal nation, service-

learning came to foster cultural connection and transformation

by linking life experiences, cultural identity, and views of service

and tribal membership. It is likely that other tribal nations or

communities may choose to focus on economic or health needs, or

a host of other pressing needs.

In our view, this case, in particular, teaches us two key

lessons. First, we cannot assume that students from marginalised

communities possess the cultural knowledge to meaningfully

engage in service-learning, even within their own communities.

As such, to increase the likelihood of service-learning being

transformative, community members and educators should work in

tandem to provide relevant learning experiences epistemologically

grounded in community values (Blouin & Perry 2009; Guffey

1997). Second, tribal identity is cultivated through experiential

activities. Not only did service-learning cement participants’

notions of service and giving back, but it also expanded the

tribal leaders’ views of what young tribal members are capable

of achieving, as evidenced by their willingness to green light the

courses Service-Learning I & II.

223 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

This research also expands upon notions of critical

transformative learning (Cunningham 1998; Lange 2004)

by leveraging CBPR as a means to raise consciousness from

tribal perspectives. Doing so provided a deep learning experience

and cultural connection for the students, and broadened tribal

conceptions of tribal membership. At the outset, cultural

identities were weak, but the service-learning project provided

a means for them to jointly transform and create understanding

of how they contributed to a stronger tribal nation. In addition,

the tribal professionals and the Tribal Governor were appreciative

of the students’ work and institutionalised service-learning in

higher education for students of this tribal nation and others.

These acts provide an opportunity for cultural restoration of the

larger tribal community.

Finally, this case not only represents gains for tribal nations,

CBPR research and service- learning, but provides an alternative

framework to further explore the roles of historic trauma and

decolonisation literature. Initially, we approached this project

as a possible remedy to historic trauma (Duran & Duran 1995;

Gone 2007), but the project evolved to using a transformative

learning theory framework. Transformative learning theory, as a

framework, does not negate the role of historical trauma; rather,

understanding cultural loss creates a disorientating dilemma and

medium for transformation. If the individual engages in reflection,

then cultural connections may ensue.

In this vein, service-learning provides a practical,

educational means to facilitate consciousness raising, which is

consistent with present-day views of the decolonisation literature.

For example, Gone (2008) and Kirmayer, Gone and Moses (2014)

maintain that tribal nations and other marginalised groups

should work towards addressing ongoing sources of exclusion

and discrimination. This case challenges Indigenous educators

to consider the importance of creating epistemological shifts by

building cultural connection in the face of disconnection. For our

participants, this created a strong antidote to colonial viewpoints.

Future researchers could further explore the linkage between

decolonisation, transformative learning theory and service-

learning. Viewed through these lenses, culturally connected tribal

members can become assets in contributing to the remediation of

colonialism and historic trauma by playing a deliberate, formative

role in the construction of their community’s future. This case thus

provides a blueprint for the application of transformative service-

learning projects in multiple other contexts.

Notes: The researchers received no funding for this research.

The Native American tribal nation discussed in this case continues

to implement and expand service-learning projects. For these

reasons it has elected to be de-identified.

REFERENCES Adams, A, Scott, J, Prince, R & Williamson, A 2014, ‘Using Community Advisory Boards to reduce environmental barriers to health in American

224 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

Indian communities, Wisconsin 2007–2012’, Preventing Chronic Disease, vol. 11, no. 160, p. 1. doi: https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd11.140014

Ahari, S, Habidzadeh, S, Yousefi, M, Amani, F & Abdi, R 2012, ‘Community based needs assessment in an urban area: A participatory action research project’, BMC Public Health, vol. 12, p. 161. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-161

Axtmann, A 2001, ‘Performative power in Native America: Powwow dancing’, Dance Research Journal, vol. 33, no. 1, p. 7. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/1478853

Baird, W & Goble, D 2008, Oklahoma: A history, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK.

Benson, L, Harkavy, I & Puckett, J 2007, Dewey’s dream: Universities and democracies in an age of education reform: Civil society, public schools, and democratic tribal membership, Temple University Press, Philadelphia, PA.

Blouin, D & Perry, E 2009, ‘Whom does service learning really serve? Community-based organizations’ perspectives on service learning’, Teaching Sociology, vol. 37, no. 2, p. 120. doi: https://doi. org/10.1177/0092055X0903700201

Brave Heart, M & DeBruyn, L 1998, ‘The American Indian holocaust: Healing historical unresolved grief’, American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research, vol. 8, no. 2, p. 56.

Brooks, A 2001, ‘Narrative dimensions of transformative learning’, paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Adult Education Research Conference, Lansing, Michigan, 1–3 June.

Castleden, H, Morgan, V & Neimanis, A 2008, ‘Researchers’ perspectives on collective/community co-authorship in participatory Indigenous research’, Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: An International Journal, vol. 5, no. 4, p. 23. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/ jer.2010.5.4.23

Charmaz, K 2011, ‘Grounded theory methods in social justice research’, in NK Denzin & YS Lincoln (eds), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research, 4th edn, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, Calif.

Clark, M & Wilson, A 1991, ‘Context and rationality in Mezirow’s theory of transformational learning’, Adult Education Quarterly, vol. 41, no. 2, p. 75. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0001848191041002002

Cornell, S & Kalt, J 2006, ‘Two approaches to economic development on American Indian reservations: One works, the other doesn’t’, vol. 3, Native Nations Institute, Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.

Cunningham, P 1998, ‘The social dimension of transformative learning’, PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, vol. 7, p. 15.

Davidson, J 2011, ‘This land is your land, this land is my land? Why the “Cobell” settlement will not resolve Indian land fractionation’, American Indian Law Review, vol. 35, no. 2, p. 575.

Davis, E 2010, ‘An administrative trail of tears: Indian removal’, The American Journal of Legal History, vol. 50, no. 1, p. 49. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajlh/50.1.49

DeMallie, RJ, 2009, ‘Community in Native America: Continuity and change among the Sioux’, Journal de la Société des américanistes, p. 185. doi: https://doi.org/10.4000/jsa.10792

225 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

Diemer, M, Rapa, L, Voight, A & McWhirter, E 2016, ‘Critical consciousness: A developmental approach to addressing marginalization and oppression’, Child Development Perspectives, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 216. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12193

Dippel, C 2014, ‘Forced coexistence and economic development: Evidence from Native American Reservations’, Econometrica, vol. 82, no. 6, p. 2131. doi: https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA11423

Duran, E & Duran, B 1995, Native American postcolonial psychology, SUNY Press, New York.

Evans-Campbell, T 2008, ‘Historical trauma in American Indian/Native Alaska communities: A multilevel framework for exploring impacts on individuals, families, and communities’, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, vol. 23, no. 13, p. 316. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260507312290

Fehren, O 2010, ‘Who organises the community? The university as an intermediary actor’, Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement, vol. 3, p. 104. doi: https://doi.org/10.5130/ijcre.v3i0.1544

Fletcher, M 2010, American Indian education: Counter narratives in racism, struggle, and the law, Routledge, London.

Fletcher, M 2013, ‘Tribal membership and Indian nationhood’, American Indian Law Review, vol. 37, no. 1, p. 1.

Foreman, G 1972, Indian removal: The emigration of the five civilized tribes of Indians, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK.

Freire, P 1996, Pedagogy of the oppressed, Penguin Group, San Mateo, CA.

Furco, A 1996, ‘Service-learning: A balanced approach to experiential education’, in B Taylor and Corporation for National Service (eds), Expanding boundaries: Serving and learning, Corporation for National Service, Washington, DC, pp. 2–6.

Goddard, R, Hoy, W & Hoy, A 2004, ‘Collective efficacy beliefs: Theoretical developments, empirical evidence, and future directions’, Educational Researcher, vol. 33, no. 3, p. 3. doi: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033003003

Goins, R, Turner, J, Gregg, J & Fiske, A 2012, ‘Psychometric properties of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale with older American Indians: The Native Elder Care Study’, Research on Aging, vol. 35, no. 2, p. 123. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027511431989

Gone, J 2007, ‘“We never was happy living like a whiteman”: Mental health disparities and the postcolonial predicament in American Indian communities’, American Journal of Community Psychology, vol. 40, nos 3–4, p. 290. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-007-9136-x

Gone, J 2008, ‘“So I can be like a whiteman”: The cultural psychology of space and place in American Indian mental health’, Culture and Psychology, vol. 40, no. 3, p. 369. doi: https://doi. org/10.1177/1354067X08092639

Grande, S 2004, Red pedagogy: Native American social and political thought, Rowman & Littlefield, Washington, DC.

Green, K 2007, ‘Who’s who: Exploring the discrepancy between the methods of defining African Americans and Native Americans’, American Indian Law Review, vol. 31, no. 1, p. 93. doi: https://doi. org/10.2307/20070774

226 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

Guffey, J 1997, ‘Turtle Island Project: Service-learning in Native communities’, in J Erikson & J Anderson (eds), Learning with the community: Concepts and models for service-learning in teacher education, Stylus Publishing, Sterling, VA, pp. 144–48.

Guillory, R & Wolverton, M 2008, ‘It’s about family: Native American student persistence in higher education’, The Journal of Higher Education, vol. 79, no. 1, p. 58. doi: https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2008.0001

Gutierrez, L 1995, ‘Understanding the empowerment process: Does consciousness make a difference?’, Social Work Research, vol. 19, no. 4, p. 229.

Hall, M 1991, ‘Gadugi: A model of service-learning for Native American communities’, Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 72, no. 10, p. 754.

Hartmann, W & Gone, J 2014, ‘American Indian historical trauma: Community perspectives from two Great Plains Medicine Men’, American Journal of Community Psychology, vol. 54, p. 274. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-014-9671-1

James, R, West, K & Madrid, T 2013, ‘Launching Native health leaders: Reducing mistrust of research through student peer mentorship’, American Journal of Public Health, vol. 103, no. 12, p. 2215. doi: https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301314

Kim, Y 2011, Minorities in Higher Education, American Council on Education, Washington, DC.

Kirmayer, L, Gone, J & Moses, J 2014, ‘Rethinking historical trauma’, Transcultural Psychiatry, vol. 51, no. 3, p. 299. doi: https://doi. org/10.1177/1363461514536358

Kitchenham, A 2008, ‘The evolution of John Mezirow’s transformative learning theory’, Journal of Transformative Education, vol. 6, no. 2, p. 104. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344608322678

Kuh, G 2008, High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter, Association of American Colleges and Universities, Washington, DC.

Lance, D 2009, ‘Cultural program designed for tribal youth kicks off this month in Norman’, Tribal News, June, p. 21.

Lange, E 2004, ‘Transformative and restorative learning: A vital dialectic for sustainable societies’, Adult Education Quarterly, vol. 54, no. 2, p. 121. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713603260276

Lipka, J 1991, ‘Toward a culturally based pedagogy: A case study of one Yup’ik Eskimo teacher’, Anthropology & Education Quarterly, vol. 22, no. 3, p. 203. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/aeq.1991.22.3.05x1050j

Lynch, M & P Stretesky 2012, ‘Native Americans and social and environmental justice: Implications for criminology’, Social Justice, vol. 38, no. 3, p. 104.

Martin, J 2007, Educational metamorphoses: Philosophical reflections on identity and culture, Rowman & Littlefield, Washington, DC.

McClellan, G 2005, ‘Native American student retention in US postsecondary education’, New Directions for Student Services, vol. 109, p. 17.

Metzler, M, Higgins, D, Beeker, C, Freudenberg, N, Lantz, P, Senturia, K & Softley, D 2003, ‘Addressing urban health in Detroit, New York City, and Seattle through community-based participatory research partnerships’,

227 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

American Journal of Public Health, vol. 93, no. 5, p. 803. doi: https://doi. org/10.2105/AJPH.93.5.803

Mezirow, J 1991, Transformative dimensions of adult learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Mezirow, J 2000, Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress, The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA.

Miles, T 2005, Ties that bind: The story of an Afro-Cherokee family in slavery and freedom, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

Minkler, M 2005, ‘Community-based research partnerships: Challenges and opportunities’, Journal of Urban Health, vol. 82, no. 2, pp. ii, 3.

Murphy, J 2007, The people have never stopped dancing: Native American modern dance histories, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN.

Newton, N 1984, ‘Federal power over Indians: Its sources, scope, and limitations, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, vol. 132, no. 2, p. 195. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/3311816

Ramirez, L & Hammack, P 2014, ‘Surviving colonization and the quest for healing: Narrative and resilience among California Indian tribal leaders’, Transcultural Psychiatry, vol. 51, no. 1, p. 112. doi: https://doi. org/10.1177/1363461513520096

Roche, V, Jones, R, Hinman, C & Seoldo, N 2007, ‘A service-learning elective in Native American culture, health and professional practice’, American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, vol. 71, no. 6, p. 129. doi: https://doi.org/10.5688/aj7106129

Scheurich, J & Young, M 1997, ‘Coloring epistemologies: Are our research epistemologies racially biased’, Educational Researcher, vol. 26, no. 4, p. 4. doi: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X026004004

Semken, S 2005, ‘Sense of place and place-based introductory Geoscience teaching for American Indian and Alaska Native undergraduates’, Journal of Geoscience Education, vol. 53, no. 2, p. 149. doi: https://doi. org/10.5408/1089-9995-53.2.149

Smith, L 1999, Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples, Zed Books, London.

Smokowski, P.R., Evans, C.B., Cotter, K.L. and Webber, K.C., 2014. ‘Ethnic identity and mental health in American Indian youth: Examining mediation pathways through self-esteem, and future optimism’, Journal of Youth and Adolescence, vol. 43, no. 3, p.343 doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10964-013-9992-7

Stake, R 1995, The art of case study research, Sage, London.

Steinman, E 2011, ‘“Making space”: Lessons from collaborations with Tribal Nations’, Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 5.

Stewart, T & N Webster 2011, Problematizing service learning: Critical reflections for development and action, Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, NC.

Sykes, BE 2014, ‘Transformative autoethnography: An examination of cultural identity and its implications for learners’, Adult Learning, vol. 25, no. 1, p. 3. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1045159513510147

228 | Gateways | Sykes, Pendley & Deacon

Tallbear, K 2003, ‘DNA, blood, and racializing the tribe’, Wicazo Sa Review, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 81.doi: https://doi.org/10.1353/wic.2003.0008

Taylor, E 1997, ‘Building upon the theoretical debate: A critical review of the empirical studies of Mezirow’s transformative learning theory’, Adult Education Quarterly, vol. 48, no. 1, p. 34. doi: https://doi. org/10.1177/074171369704800104

Taylor, E 2008, ‘Transformative learning theory’, New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, vol. 119, p. 5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/ ace.301

Thompson, M 2012, ‘Career barriers and coping efficacy among Native American students’, Journal of Career Assessment, vol. 21, no. 2, p. 311. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072712471501

Thornton, R 2006, ‘Native American demographic and tribal survival into the twenty-first century’, American Studies, vol. 46, no. 1, p. 23.

Tighe, S 2014, ‘“Of course we are crazy”: Discrimination of Native American Indians through criminal justice’, Justice Policy Journal, vol. 11, no. 1, p. 1.

Tinto, V 2003, ‘Learning better together: The impact of learning communities on student success’, Higher Education Monograph Series, vol. 1, p. 1.

US Department of Education, Upward Bound, TRIO Programming, USA, viewed April 2017, https://www2.ed.gov/programs/trioupbound/index. html

Vaughan, W 2002, ‘Effects of cooperative learning on achievement and attitude among students of color’, The Journal of Educational Research, vol. 95, no. 6, p. 359. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670209596610

Villazor, R 2008, ‘Blood quantum land laws and the race versus political identity dilemma’, California Law Review, vol. 96, no. 3, p. 801.

Weaver, H 2012, ‘Urban and Indigenous: The challenges of being a Native American in the city’, Journal of Community Practice, vol. 20, p. 470. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/10705422.2012.732001

West, A, Williams, E, Suzukovich, E, Strangeman, K & Novins, D 2012, ‘A mental health needs assessment of urban American Indian youth and families’, American Journal of Community Psychology, vol. 49, p. 441. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-011-9474-6

Wilson, A & Boatright, M 2011, ‘One adolescent’s construction of Native identity in school: “Speaking with dance and not in words and writing”’, Research in the Teaching of English, vol. 45, no. 3, p. 252.

Writer, J 2001, ‘Identifying the identified: The need for critical exploration of Native American identity within educational contexts’, Action in Teacher Education, vol. 22, no. 4, p. 40. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.200 1.10463028

Yarime, M, Trencher, G, Mino, T, Scholz, R, Olsson, L, Ness, B & Rotmans, J 2012, ‘Establishing sustainability science in higher education institutions: Towards an integration of academic development, institutionalization, and stakeholder collaborations’, Sustainability Science, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 101. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-012-0157-5

Yin, R 2009, Case study research: Design and methods, Sage Publications, London.

Journal of Adult Education

Volume 42, Number 2, 2013

Culture and Place:

A Legacy Darrell Kipp Helped Create

Gary J. Conti

Abstract

Darrell Robes Kipp was a Blackfeet elder who was a national leader in the language immersion movement. He co-founded the Piegan Institute, and its schools have become a model for those seeking to preserve and promote their native language. In addition, he served as a Visiting Native American Scholar at Oklahoma State University. In that role, he helped the Adult Education graduate program infuse culture as a natural part of the learning process. From this base, the Adult Education program created a course called Culture and Place and which was taught several times. This course was based on the assumption that culture and place are inseparable and that they reinforce each other. Following campus-based preparation, this course involved students traveling to on-site locations in Montana to interact with local adult educators and to Highlander Research Center in Tennessee. The students found this experience a transformational event in both their education and their lives.

Remembering Darrell Kipp

If every time an elder dies in a cultural community, it's like a library burning down, then on November 21, 2013, the Blackfeet Tribe lost their Library of Congress. For on that day, Darrell Robes Kipp passed away. Kipp was a Blackfeet author, historian, film-maker, and, most importantly, educator. Kipp rose from a humble back- ground on the Blackfeet Reservation to become “a leader in the language preservation movement” (Ogden, 2008, para. 70).

Valuing Education

Kipp’s life experiences taught him about the struggle for an education and the value that it can

1

provide. Kipp came from a household where his mother had completed 10 grade and his father had finished 3th rd

grade. His first 8 years of schooling were in a one-room schoolhouse in a rural community on the Blackfeet Reservation which was 10 miles away from the main reservation community where he completed high school. Although he was not adequately prepared for college, he persevered and earned his bachelor’s degree with a major in English in 1966 from Eastern Montana College (Kipp, 2000, p. 2). Following a tour of duty in the military, he returned in 1970 to the Blackfeet Reservation and taught English at Browning High School. However, he did not find this a fulfilling experience; Kipp said, “As a student I was an inmate there, and when they hired me as a teacher, I was essentially a guard” (Ogden, 2008, para. 46). By 1974, Kipp was on his way to Harvard where he graduated with a Masters of Education degree with a focus on social change and institutional change (Kipp, 2000, p. 2). At Harvard, “Kipp came to understand that his people were collectively suffering from something akin to post-traumatic stress syndrome. Language, Kipp believes, has the power to heal those wounds” (Ogden, 2008, para. 31).

Kipp had a passion for learning and focused this on his native language and culture. Along with Dr. Dorothy Still Smoking and Thomas Edward Little Plume, he co- founded the Piegan Institute in 1987. The Piegan Insti- tute is a nonprofit research and educational organization dedicated to researching, promoting, and preserving

Native languages. The vision of the Piegan Institute is both local and national where:

Our community-based objectives are to increase the number of Blackfeet language speakers, to increase the cultural knowledge base of commu- nity members, and to actively influence positive community-based change. Our national objec- tives are to promote support for Native language issues through advocacy and education and to provide a voice to the national and international dialogue on Native Language restoration. (Piegan Institute, n.d., para. 3)

Language Immersion Movement

The tool that Kipp and his co-founders used at the Piegan Institute is language immersion. The language immersion model is an educational process that immerses the students in the native language throughout the entire school day. All school subjects are taught in the native language. Only Blackfeet, or Piegan, is spoken in the Piegan Institute schools. The Piegan Institute's schools are based on the belief that "the best way to acquire a second language is the same way children acquire a first language: Immerse students in a second language-rich environment rather than the tradi- tional teaching-learning situation” (Reyhner, Echo- Hawk, & Rosier, 2009, p. 91).

Under Kipp's direction, the Piegan Institute established several immersion schools, and

Current results reveal that the program has had a profoundly positive influence on Blackfeet youth. There is an increase in academic achieve- ment, positive Native identity, self-esteem, and an increase of young people speaking in their Native Blackfeet Indian language. (Benham & Cooper, 2000, p. 169)

Since it founding, the Piegan Institute “has developed a national reputation for innovative programming, and its success inspired Kipp and his colleagues to launch Nizipuhwahsin (Real Speak) School, a Blackfeet lan- guage immersion school for children kindergarten through eighth grade. The school offers a complete

2

curriculum in Blackfeet and has won international recognition for its success reversing the decline in the number of native speakers of Blackfeet” (Newberry Library, n.d., para. 2 ).

Kipp contributed to the language preservation movement with both action and ideas. Not only has his Blackfeet language immersion school for grades K-8 “become a model for indigenous peoples worldwide” (Ogden, 2008, para. 5), but his clearly articulated ideas and encouragement have provided guidance on how to develop successful native language programs. In his often-referenced book, he starts with a summary that provides a laser-like focus on the priorities for success:

Keep in mind that the language is the key. There is nothing else. There is no other priority. There are no other issues. There is no reason to defend your motives, your actions, or your vision. You do not defend yourself, your own language flu- ency, or lack of fluency. You do it. Action is the key. Native children who are actively speaking the language are your only results. (Kipp, 2000, p. 1) Kipp offers four simple rules to implement these

priorities for developing a program to revitalize the language. These rules are:

• Rule 1: Never Ask Permission, Never Beg to Save the Language

• Rule 2: Don’t Debate the Issues • Rule 3: Be Very Action-Oriented; Just Act • Rule 4: Show, Don’t Tell. (pp. 5-19)

To complement these rules, “use your language as your curriculum–botany, geography, political science, philosophy, history are all embedded in the language” (p. 1).

Kipp’s commitment to preserving and promoting the Blackfeet culture through its language is recognized and appreciated by those who knew and worked with him. Kipp “was the one who sounded the siren [for language preservation]....He wasn’t the only one, but he was the one who sounded it very loudly on a national level.... He’s sort of legendary in that sense” (Ogden, 2008, para. 71).

A Personal Note and Call to Action

The giant described above is the man that most of the world knew as Darrell Kipp. Lesser known is the way that he helped energize the Adult Education program at Oklahoma State University. During the Spring Semester of 1999, Darrell took time out of his busy schedule to serve as a Visiting Native American Scholar in a project funded by the Kellogg Foundation. The purpose of the Native American Visiting Scholar program was to bring outstanding scholars from the Native American community to campus to serve as a role model for others and to help the university reach out and provide more services to the tribal people of Oklahoma. During this 8-week appointment, Darrell

3

taught two graduate-level seminars. One was on the main campus in Stillwater, and the other was on the rapidly-developing campus in Tulsa. The remainder of his time was devoted to activities that he initiated that he thought would help the university better serve the people of Oklahoma.

Darrell’s presence dramatically changed the Adult Education graduate program at Oklahoma State Univer- sity. Through the dynamism of his personality, the stories that he told, the examples that he shared, and the readings that he encouraged, the students overwhelm- ingly grasped the importance of culture on learning. Although groundwork had been laid previous to Darrell’s arrival, his presence and actions were the catalyst that clearly signaled to students that it not only was permissible to relate culture to learning but that it was also expected for critically thinking students to make this connection. Suddenly, students realized that they could draw upon their own experiences to give meaning to the content about which they were learning. Darrell’s rules of not asking permission and being action oriented opened a flood gate of excitement and liberation that remained throughout the history of the program. As word spread about the key role that culture played in the graduate program, a record number of minority students enrolled in and graduated from the program. While many other factors entered into this overall success rate and into the validation of culture as a key element in the learning of these adult graduate students, Darrell’s role in this process was remarkable

because it was in his classes that the students first recognized their new empowerment related to culture.

As a result of this newfound spirit and thirst for learning, a series of courses were developed that were titled Culture and Place. The central idea of these courses was that the local culture and the place in which it exists are integrally linked. In addition to energizing students and their families, the courses received the 2003 Curriculum Innovation Award from the Commis- sion of Professors of Adult Education. Like so many other action projects, the details of this project have not been formally documented in the past. However, they are now being recorded because reflecting upon this exciting time and the legacy that Darrell helped create at Oklahoma State University remind me of the haunt- ing words in The Shawshank Redemption when Red (Morgan Freeman) talks about Andy (Tim Robbins): “Still, the place you live in is that much more drab and empty now that they're gone. I guess I just miss my friend.”

Culture and Place

Culture and Place was an Adult Education class that was been taught over a 4-year period during the summer school session. It was based on the assumption that culture and place are inseparable and that they reinforce each other. It involved students traveling to on-site locations to interact with the sites and with directors of adult education agencies to view and discuss the impact

4

of the local culture on the development and operation of the agency. These classes involved students traveling from Oklahoma to Montana and to Tennessee. Each location was visited twice. Class sizes grew from 16 for the first class to 54 for the last class.

The Culture and Place class developed as a result of the relationships and interests stemming from a W. K. Kellogg Foundation grant received by Dr. Gary Conti shortly after his move from Montana State University to Oklahoma State University (OSU). This grant provided for various Visiting Native American Scholars to come from Montana for an 8-week period to teach classes at OSU and to conduct liaison activities with the local tribes in Oklahoma. The purpose of the grant was to provide Native American scholars with teaching experience in higher education and to help establish ties between the OSU Adult Education program and tribal communities. In addition, the activities associated with the class provided a public recognition that culture, the discussion of cultural issues, and the recognition of cultural origins were a legitimate part of the Adult Education program.

As a result of the classes taught by the Visiting Native American Scholars, the concept of the influence of culture on learning was infused into the Adult Education curriculum. The visiting scholars taught courses both on the main campus in Stillwater and on the new and developing campus in Tulsa. The greatest

impact was in Tulsa, and these classes had some students who drove 120 miles from Oklahoma City.

These classes and the development of a cultural theme related to the program facilitated the recruitment of ethnic minorities in the program, and the Adult Education program grew to have approximately 30% minority students. This was over 50% above the minority representation in the state population, and the Adult Education program was recognized by the Graduate College for its leadership in the graduation of African-American and Native American students. The activities from the Kellogg grant for Visiting Native American Scholars and the classes that developed from it played a key role in making this high minority success rate possible.

Several classes and activities developed as a result of the seminars taught by the Visiting Native American Scholars. One of the visiting scholars was Dr. Dorothy Still Smoking who is an international leader in the language immersion movement. Language immersion is a process of preserving and promoting native language by creating programs that totally immerse the learner in the language and its cultural ramifications. While Dr. Still Smoking was in Oklahoma, an all-day conference was organized on the OSU-Tulsa campus to provide the participants with information about the immersion concept and to stimulate them to take action to begin to implement the immersion concept in their tribal communities. In addition, it was hoped that the

5

participants would become aware of the language situation in other tribes and that they would begin to develop stronger networks with others concerning the immersion concept. The conference had approximately 110 participants representing 19 tribes. The students from the Adult Education program participated in the planning and the conducting of the conference. As a result, they gained direct experience with cultural issues in the Native American community and observed the impact of culture on learning and on people's lives.

Several additional classes developed from the seminars taught by the visiting scholars. One class was a cooperative effort with the Graduate College. The Dean of the Graduate College had a special com- mitment and sensitivity to Native Americans and their role in the history of Oklahoma. This was reflected in his hiring practices and in an interdisciplinary com- mittee that he had set up. Despite his constant efforts, he was not successful in getting any classes related to Native American topics started in Tulsa, which is just a little over an hour's drive from the tribal headquarters for the Cherokee Nation and near several other tribes. Therefore, one Visiting Native American Scholar seminar was rolled into a regular 3-credit class and was promoted to the entire community. Since most native languages are oral, art serves as a means of document- ing and communicating many things that are done in writing in communities with a written language. There- fore, various expert Native American artists were enlisted to present in the class. Their art included

numerous media such as painting, pottery, jewelry making, and beading. Most of the class sessions were held in the artists’ studios. One session was held in the Gilcrease Museum where the artist's work was on display. The class was initiated by a presentation by the Chief of the Cherokee Nation. This class firmly estab- lished the commitment of the Adult Education program to a cultural component in its curriculum and excited students about the influence of culture on learning.

Three other classes reinforced and further developed the commitment to culture in the curriculum. One was a course on Comparative Cultures: African-American and Native American Cultures. As a result of the course emphasizing the role of art in transmitting the culture, the students requested a course that would allow them to explore the similarities and complementary nature of the African-American and the Native American cul- tures. In addition, the students requested that Dr. Still Smoking be asked to return to teach a class that further explored her work with Blackfeet elders. Since the elders in any community are the keepers of the knowl- edge, a qualitative research course was developed on Research in the Community. Finally, another qual- itative research seminar was taught on Writing Personal Histories by another Montana scholar that the students had met as a part of the cultural exchange activities. Collectively, all of these activities created a climate in which the students consciously reflected upon the role of culture in learning. As a result, students repeatedly

6

voiced the need to actively go on-site to actually experience the cultures about which they were learning. This led to classes being planned to visit Montana to learn more about the Native American cultures and to visit Tennessee to learn at the Highlander Research and Education Center of Myles Horton.

The Culture and Place classes were taught for four summers. The first and third year the classes went to Montana; the second and fourth year they went to Tennessee. The courses were originally taught under a "special issues" number, but a permanent number was later approved for the course. Each of the classes involved approximately 1-week of travel on-site. Class meetings before the travel involved orientation sessions related to the travel, discussions of readings for the course, and assignment of group topics for responsibilities during the visit. Post-visit activities involved discussions and reflections on the visit.

Culture and Place in Montana

The central focus of the classes that visited Montana was to explore the concept that culture and place are yoked concepts. That is, they are inseparable and pull together. To do this, a variety of adult education agencies were visited. Knowles' classic categorization of adult education agencies was used: central function, secondary function, allied function, or non-educational agency (Darkenwald & Merriam, 1982, pp. 151-177). Agencies were visited in both Montana and neighboring Alberta, Canada. These agencies included world class and local museums, interpretive centers, historical societies, a progressive ranch, tribal and Canadian community colleges, Glacier and Yellowstone National Parks, Chief Joseph Historic Site, the Blackfeet pow wow, the Piegan Institute language immersion school, a cultural preservation agency, buffalo jumps, and a Native American community center. The readings for the course included: Saga of Chief Joseph (1941/1965) by H. A. Howard, Unbounded Horizons: The Respon- sive Mind in Place (1998) by E. L. Kittredge, and Tribal Education: A Case Study of Blackfeet Elders (1996) by D. Still Smoking.

In addition to students doing unique things such as

participating in a pow wow and walking the sites of ancient buffalo jumps, other things developed from the trips. As a result of the informal discussions, one stu- dent volunteered her technical expertise to develop a website for the progressive ranch that was visited; she used this as a class project at the technical college which she teaches and thereby introduced her entire class to the Montana culture. Another student for- mulated her dissertation as a result of discussions between sites. Both Montana and the students experienced the impact of racial diversity as a group with a large number of African Americans traveled a state with less than .01% Blacks. The visit to the Cree community center in Medicine Hat, Alberta, sparked a theme for a doctoral dissertation writing class that was formed when the students returned. Finally, the visit to Montana created a tremendous desire by students to visit the Highlander Center.

Visits to Highlander: Harvesting Seeds of Fire

Highlander Research and Education Center is a very special place in the Adult Education movement and the efforts to empower disenfranchised groups in America. The center, which is often referred to as Highlander Folk School, was founded by Myles Horton in 1932 in Tennessee. As a true continuing educator, Horton declared that “nothing will change until we change– until we throw off our dependence and act for

7

ourselves” (Moyers, 1983, p. 248). With this guiding principle, Highlander has been in the forefront of the Labor Movement, the Civil Rights Movement, environmental issues, and international cooperation of disenfranchised people. Highlander holds the copyright on “We Shall Overcome,” and Horton was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize early in the 1980s. In his two- part special on Horton and Highlander for the Public Broadcasting System, Bill Moyers pointed out that:

In the early 1950's, Horton turned the emphasis of his workshops from union organizing to civil rights. Highlander was now a principal gathering place of the moving forces of the black revolution. Martin Luther King came; so did Rosa Parks, Andrew Young, Julian Bond, Stokley Carmichael, and scores of unsung foot soldiers in the long march of Southern blacks toward equality. The state tried to close it down; the Klan harassed it; state troopers raided it. But Highlander seemed indestructible, and so did Myles Horton. (p. 248)

Rosa Parks attributes her courage for standing up to oppression to her experiences at Highlander. Martin Luther King was the featured speaker at the school’s 50th university. Throughout the years, countless adult educators have turned to Highlander for inspiration and for a source of ideas on how to apply adult learning principles in a fashion that will result in community- based change.

The ideas and mission of Highlander and the adult learning principles practiced by Myles Horton had a

central role in the graduate program in Adult Education at Oklahoma State University. In addition to visiting Highlander several times and interacting with Horton, one of the program’s professors, Dr. Gary Conti, had published several articles and booklets on Horton and Highlander. He also hosted the last trip that Horton made to the reservation communities in Montana. Because of the importance of Horton’s ideas and of the faculty connection with Highlander, students in the graduate program had read much about Highlander. However, just covering the ideas of Horton as part of other classes did not satisfy the learning needs of many of the students in the program. The OSU students in Adult Education had studied these thing; now they wanted to visit the actual site and to experience and touch history. Therefore, they took the lead in requesting and organizing a continuing education experience that extended the functions of a traditional educational program.

The purpose of the class was to study Highlander while at Highlander and in a Highlander fashion. Therefore, the trips to Highlander were organized as retreats. While conferences are organized on the behaviorist model, retreats differ from conferences in that they are based on the humanistic model. People come first, and the agenda is a flexible guide to facilitate their learning. At Highlander, music is an important vehicle for providing people with a common oral language, and the folk stories of the people are a

8

mechanism for helping them reflect on their past and their culture. Consequently, the course was set up to analyze the role of adult education in social justice movements by doing a case study of Myles Horton and the Highlander Folk School.

Together the students and faculty planned a course that involved both an in-depth study of the principles and practices of Highlander and also involved a field- trip to the Highlander Center in New Market, Tennessee. This course and retreat was organized under the title of “Harvesting Seeds of Fire: The Highlander Experience.” The academic and preparation stage of the course involved students meeting in formal and informal groups to discuss readings, view videos, and listen to audio tapes related to Highlander and the movements with which it has been associated. Study groups were formed related to Music and Culture, Civil Rights, Participatory Research, Paulo Friere, and Economic Development and Community Action. Each of these groups was responsible for a presentation at Highlander. Students prepared for this learning experience and their presentations from a library of books that had been purchased from the bookstore at Highlander and from books written by or about Myles Horton.

First Trip

After numerous weeks of meetings and reading a common core of material, the group set out from Tulsa to Highlander, which is located approximately 20 miles

from Knoxville. The 27 people in the group caravanned in personal autos so that group learning could occur during the trip. Those in the cars included the graduate students, family members, and special guests who had a burning desire to learn more about Highlander. Like the typical participants in workshops at Highlander, the group included a diverse group in terms of gender, age, and ethnic origin including Blacks, Whites, and Native Americans. Two cultural leaders from the Blackfeet Reservation, two community educators from Montana, two teacher-educators from Ohio, and one international student from Africa participated. Since the trip was approximately 800 miles, the group stopped in Memphis for the evening. While there, the group visited Beale Street and Graceland.

In the Highlander fashion, the exact format for the three-day workshop at Highlander was generated by the participants once they arrived. Because of the role of music in Highlander’s history, the Music and Culture group took the lead in weaving elements of music and culture throughout all of the sessions. The clock was completely disregarded, and educational sessions and informal meetings were held throughout the day and night. Meals were learning sessions. Informal discus- sion groups met throughout the day and evening in the meeting rooms, the library, and the dorms.

The purpose of the retreat was to talk, think, and reflect about Highlander while actually at Highlander. To further stimulate this, two Highlander-style mini- workshops were embedded within the overall work-

9

shop. One workshop was conducted by a community educator from Montana and started the participants in the process of writing their personal histories. The other workshop was conducted during one of the breaks and taught the participants how to bead.

This class was a transformative learning experience for all those involved. The aura of being at this special place and of actually finding and holding documents in the archives written and signed by famous Americans such as Martin Luther and Coretta Scott King impacted everyone both intellectually and spiritually. Participants left with a changed spirit about themselves, their educational program, and the power of education. The group members continued to exchange photos, e-mails, and impressions long after their return home. One student changed the focus of her dissertation research because of the visit, and another planned a trip back to Highlander for a more in-depth search of the archives. All felt that they have joined as a foot soldier in the march for human justice that Highlander signifies.

Second Trip

Because of the long hours spent in travel and because of the learning opportunities that are possible when in a group, a 54-passenger bus was charted for the second visit to Highlander. This allowed guests, spouses, significant others, and children to participate in the activity. In order to plant the seeds for a future generation, the costs for three of the children were covered by a special fund available to Dr. Conti from a gift from Dr. and Mrs. Charles R. Sachatello. Learning

activities on the bus included songs and viewing movies that dealt with either social justice, authority, or teaching themes.

One night on the trip was spent in Memphis. This allowed the group to dine and spend an evening on Beale Street. More importantly, however, it allowed a visit to the National Civil Rights Museum. This mu- seum is built on the assassination site of Martin Luther King, Jr. and is one of the most powerful reminders in the country of the struggles of the Civil Rights Move- ment. While there were numerous elementary school groups visiting, our group was one of the few totally integrated groups in the museum. While we know the impact the museum had on us, we can only speculate of the impact on hundreds of young Black children who saw our group members embracing each other in tears as they went through the museum together.

The Highlander trip provided the Adult Education students with a chance to touch history. Everyone in the group was critically conscious about the fact that they were interacting with one of the most crucial elements of American history and that one of their adult education agencies played a central role in this history. Both history and their chosen field of study and professional practice came alive for them!

Just as with the Montana trips, several spin-offs resulted from this visit to Highlander. Two of the participants used their jobs to plan trips for community groups to the National Civil Rights Museum. The students developed a new and deeper sense of the his- torical perspectives of social justice issues and of the

social role of adult education. Most important, the students experienced a bonding from a common and emotional ex- perience; this bonding allowed them to function as a com- munity in order to support each other through the dissertation process. Finally, seeds have been planted with a group of young people who will carry on the movement.

10

Discussion

Culture and Place was a series of four courses that allowed the Adult Education program at Oklahoma State University to link adult learning with the context of the culture and place from which it evolves. The courses developed from the activities of the Visiting Native American Scholars program, and the recognition of culture in the curriculum was a factor contributing to the program recruiting a high number of minority students and to them graduating. The courses involved visiting numerous adult education agencies and ana- lyzing how the mission of these agencies is driven by the culture of the local place. These visits provided the students with powerful transformative experiences that vastly expanded the horizons of their educational pro- gram and that truly made their educational program a life-changing experience.

Transformative Experience

The students describe these classes as a transformative experience. When they use this term, they understand and mean it in the way described by Jack Mezirow (1991). These are experiences that transformed their perspectives about themselves and about the role of culture. They gained experiences that provided them with concrete examples of important historical events. Moreover, they developed a new understanding and respect for their field of study. Accompanying this was an increased awareness of their

responsibilities as an adult educator. The students who participated in these classes made constant reference to them and consistently said how this participation had changed their lives. Their written comments were also consistent and can be summed up by these two comments: “This course was a reflective INSPI- RATION! Thank you for having it!” and “This course was one of the MOST memorable and valuable of my doctoral career–offer more like this.”

Uniqueness

The program was unique because of the place that it visited and the way that it was organized. Highlander has been a catalyst for learning related to social action for over 80 years. The success and power of its adult learning principles have withstood the test of time (Conti & Fellenz, 1986). While there are other special places in the history of the adult education movement in the United States such as Chautauqua, none have had the impact on overall history as has Highlander.

A course on Highlander could have been faculty planned and conducted on a traditional campus. However, this course involved the faculty providing the initial structure and the beginning reading list. Students quickly took control of the exact format of the sessions at Highlander and presented the content. Since music and culture are critical elements used at Highlander to encourage dialogue and reflection on one’s experiences, the Music and Culture group took the lead in organizing the retreat. These themes were reinforced with the mini-

11

workshops on writing personal histories and on beading. Significantly, the first workshop ended with the group linked together in a darkened room holding candles and singing “We Shall Overcome”.

Quality

Most of the participants considered this class the most important educational experience of their lives. All evaluations were overwhelmingly positive. One African-American student wrote that this class fulfilled a dream that she has had for years since first hearing about Highlander but one that she feared would never be achieved. In a follow-up note, another wrote that she was still in awe that she not only got to visit Highlander but also had a chance to introduce her son to Highlander and to actually conduct a workshop there. As for her son who was on his way to England to work on his master’s degree in history, he applied to the graduate program at Oklahoma State University and earned his doctorate in adult education when he returned from England.

Service Provided

This class provided a unique educational experience for adult learners interested in issues of social justice. The graduate program at Oklahoma State University was expanded to include an in-depth analysis of a special topic that was of great interest to the students. The course was created in response to a student request, and students were involved in every aspect of planning and conducting the course. Community educators from Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Alberta were invited to participate in the class. Thus, the class allowed several adults the opportunity to purposively direct a personally meaningful educational experience.

Contribution to Continuing Education

This course demonstrates that when continuing education activities are based on sound adult learning principles, they can be extremely successful and can be transformative learning experiences for the participants. This course was initiated by the student’s need to know,

was fueled by participatory practices, and resulted in reflective experiences for all. It allowed students to give meaning to their experiences. Moreover, it stimulated them to plan further learning projects.

Replicability by Other Institutions

While the exact atmosphere and dynamics of this class can never be duplicated, the planning model and principles upon which this class were based can be replicated by any continuing education program. Two concepts are especially important. First, classes should be held where they are most appropriate; while one can talk about places like Highlander, many valuable learning situations can only be experienced by direct field visits. Second, learning is a participatory process; those interested in the learning experience should and can be involved in planning and conducing the learning experience. When these two concepts are combined with innovation and trust, incredible adult learning experiences are possible.

References

Benham, M., & Cooper, J. (Eds.). (2000). Indigenous educational models for contemporary practice: In our mother's voice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Conti, G. J., & Fellenz, R. A. (1986). Myles Horton: Ideas that have withstood the test of time. Adult Literacy and Basic Education, 10, 1-18.

12

Darkenwald, G. G., & Merriam, S. B. (1982). Adult education: Foundations of practice. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers.

Kipp, D. R. (2000). Encouragement, guidance, insights, and lessons learned for Native language activists developing their own tribal language programs. Browning, MT: Piegan Institute.

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Moyers, B. (1983). The adventures of a radical hillbilly: An interview with Myles Horton. Appalachian Journal, 9(4), 248-285.

Newberry Library (n.d.). Lewis and Clark and the Indian Country. Chicago: Author. Retrieved from http://publications.newberry.org/lewisandclark/ consultants/kipp.html

Ogden, K. (2008). Kipp’s trip. Boston: Harvard Grad-

uate School of Education. Retrieved from http:// www.gse.harvard.edu/news_events/ed/2008/fall/fe atures/kipp.html.

Piegan Institute (n.d.). About us. Browning, MT: Author. Retrieved from http://www.piegan institute.org/aboutpiegan.html

Reyhner, J., Echo-Hawk, W., & Rosier, P. (2009). Education and language restoration. New York: Chelsea House Publications.

Gary J. Conti was Professor of Adult Education at Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, and is now retired in Three Forks, MT.

13

Copyright of MPAEA Journal of Adult Education is the property of Mountain Plains Adult Education Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

381

Harvard Educational Review Vol. 82 No. 3 Fall 2012 Copyright © by the President and Fellows of Harvard College

Designing Indigenous Language Revitalization

M A RY HER MES University of Minnesota

MEGA N BA NG University of Washington

A NA NDA M A R IN Northwestern University

Endangered Indigenous languages have received little attention within the American educational research community. However, within Native American communities, language revitalization is pushing education beyond former iterations of culturally relevant curriculum and has the potential to radically alter how we understand cul- ture and language in education. Situated within this gap, Mar y Hermes, Megan Bang, and Ananda Marin consider the role of education for Indigenous languages and frame specific questions of Ojibwe revitalization as a part of the wider under- standing of the context of community, language, and Indigenous knowledge produc- tion. Through a retrospective analysis of an interactive multimedia materials project, the authors present ways in which design research, retooled to fit the need of commu- nities, may inform language revitalization efforts and assist with the evolution of community-based research design. Broadly aimed at educators, the praxis described in this article draws on community collaboration, knowledge production, and the evolu- tion of a design within Indigenous language revitalization.

In this article we use the case study of an Indigenous language material devel- opment project and other surrounding moments of Indigenous knowledge creation to purposefully consider and learn from Indigenous language revital- ization efforts in a specific community. Using retrospective analysis (diSessa & Cobb, 2004), we explore questions of design as they pertain to the evolution of a community-based design process for language revitalization. Our analysis is situated within the context of design-based research, an iterative methodology that seeks both to generate and advance fundamental knowledge and theoreti-

382

Harvard Educational Review

cal insights and simultaneously to develop transformative praxis of real prob- lems (diSessa & Cobb, 2004).

For Indigenous communities and scholars, the long-standing problem of superficial incorporation of culture into curriculum is a critical and reoccur- ring pattern and central challenge to overcome. Efforts to remedy “failure” of Native American students in schooling through cultural-based education and teacher education (Demmert & Towner, 2003) have continually run into binary walls that represent dichotomized thinking and structural racism. One such example, the idea of “living in two worlds,” has become so overused in culture-based education that it functions in a new stereotypical way (Henze & Vanette, 1993). Design-based research (DBR) may be a useful methodological approach to deepen insights for understanding how functioning in multiple discourses translates into strategies for language revitalization while also illumi- nating the role of Indigenous knowledge systems in learning. To explore these issues, we describe the participatory process of materials creation in an Indig- enous context to begin to understand what theoretical and practical tools may help carry language learning beyond schools and back to Indigenous homes and families.

During the spring of 2010, Mar y Hermes traveled to Chicago and col- laborated with researchers at the American Indian Center (AIC), including Megan Bang and Ananda Marin, both of whom were participating in a col- laborative research grant project with the American Indian Center, North- western University, and the Menominee Culture and Language Commission. All three authors are of mixed-heritage descent and have associations with the Lac Courte Orielles Ojibwe reser vation in Hayward, Wisconsin, and the urban American Indian community in Chicago. The central aim of this col- laboration was to consider the possibilities of language revitalization in urban Indian contexts where certain constraints (e.g., few fluent speakers, many lan- guages, decentralized community), as well as potential assets (e.g., technologi- cal fluency and access), would necessarily alter current language revitalization configurations and theor y. Prior to Mar y’s arrival at the AIC, staff and com- munity members had been participating in weekly language nights. At these language nights, people gathered to eat dinner and share language, including Anishinaabemowin, Diné, Chahta, and Menominee. With Mary’s arrival, staff at the AIC, researchers, and community members began using an interactive language learning software called Ojibwemodaa! and participated in immer- sion-like workshops. At the same time, we began to discuss the relationship between language revitalization, materials design, and design-based research, which soon became a part of our ever yday conversations. This retrospective analysis and the design ideas presented here arise from the relationships and conversations we developed across community-based organizations and educa- tional institutions.

In this article we discuss three different, but related, windows of opportu- nity—or moments—of Indigenous knowledge production within Ojibwe lan-

383

Designing Indigenous Language Revitalization hermes, bang, and marin

guage revitalization: (1) language immersion schools, (2) ceremonial and rela- tional epistemology, and (3) Ojibwe movie-making camps. We then continue the discussion with a retrospective analysis of the process, including questions we asked and decisions we made based on the specific context and needs of the community. Two important questions arise from this analysis:

1. How can a community production process regenerate meaning making with Indigenous languages and create transformative language revitaliza- tion theory and practice?

2. How can different processes for materials creation (aided by techno- logical tools) open up spaces for deeper cultural inclusion in academic discourses?

While using this example of a technologically driven multimedia language software project, we situate our discussion broadly in ideas about language and culture in context, specifically framed by the movement toward Indigenous language revitalization.

Academic and Community Efforts Toward Language Revitalization

Indigenous language revitalization in the United States comes out of the desire of Indigenous community/nation members to see their languages (and cultures) sur vive and come into daily use again as well as from a movement among scholars concerned with language loss (Fishman, 1991, 2001; Hinton & Hale, 2001; Krauss, 1998; Reyhner & Lockard, 2009). The language revital- ization movement is passionate, political, and deeply personal, particularly for many Native people who are acutely aware that the federal government’s attempted genocide was the direct cause of Indigenous language loss. The broader academic origin of the field of documenting endangered languages emanates from an awareness of the innate value of the world’s diversity of lan- guages (Krauss, 1998; Maffi, 2005). While these boundaries are changing, it is the intersection of community and academic efforts that we find interest- ing (Hermes, 2012; Penfield et al., 2008). We aim to map the terrain of lan- guage revitalization as both revitalization and documentation as we attempt to develop theoretical insights across contexts.

Ideas from design-based research (DBR) help us unpack the process of learning and cultural production within the processes of materials creation. Through exploring essential questions as they arose from practice in commu- nity in this project, we see that a new field is emerging around the pedagogy of Indigenous language revitalization. Drawing on language revitalization efforts based in community activism and academic efforts of language documenta- tion, this article takes advantage of the participatory process of materials cre- ation and the development of learning environments designed from, and cen- tered on, Indigenous epistemologies, philosophies, and languages.

384

Harvard Educational Review

Design-Based Research

Design-based research, an iterative methodology, pairs the design of learning environments with research on learning. This methodology enables research- ers to contextualize theoretical questions about learning within people’s lives (Collins, Joseph, & Bielaczyc, 2004). According to Edelson (2002), DBR pro- vides “guidelines for the process rather than the product” and is a rich, com- plex, and often recursive practice bounded by process decisions as well as decisions about needs, opportunities, and form (p. 115). Further, the design process often results in the development of frameworks that provide prescrip- tive solutions to challenges and “describe the characteristics that a designed artifact must have to achieve a particular set of goals in a particular context” (p. 114). Yet, to date, DBR has been relatively quiet on the impacts of culture or sociohistoric context in schooling and design. We contend that DBR, criti- cally reconfigured, may serve as a productive methodology to support ongoing efforts for language revitalization.

What kinds of design decisions are essential to revitalization efforts that would bring language back into the home? And what kind of process is most beneficial in creating these materials? DBR intentionally takes up these ques- tions and integrates them into an iterative process of design, implementa- tion, analysis, redesign, and reimplementation. Design-based research is dis- tinctly different from historical approaches to design in which design was a means of testing a theor y (diSessa & Cobb, 2004). Edelson (2002) argues that there are three types of theories that can be learned from DBR: domain theories, design frameworks, and design methodologies. Of critical impor- tance are the ways in which this evolving methodology no longer focuses on testing a theor y but, rather, becomes the context in which theor y develop- ment occurs. Further, DBR also has the affordance of engaging educational researchers in developing immediate solutions for critical, timely, and practi- cal problems in education. We are interested in extending this idea to com- munity participation.

Community-Based Design Research Methodology Community-based design research redistributes power in the above charac- terization by making educational research immediately accountable to and in the service of communities (Bang, Medin, Washinawatok, & Chapman, 2010). There are multiple levels at which service and accountability are nuanced by specific community contexts. Scholars engaged in DBR have recognized the constraints of context on design and purport to work toward the most optimal design given current constraints. Interestingly, the lessons involved in DBR often uncover the sociohistoric foundations in which learning, education, and language are deeply entrenched, both within outsider institutions and communities as well as within our own communities (Gutiérrez & Vossoughi, 2010). As these foundations are uncovered, possibilities for making new stra- tegic decisions for our language revitalization efforts emerge.

385

Designing Indigenous Language Revitalization hermes, bang, and marin

The retooling of DBR toward language revitalization as employed in the ser vices of community-based design research may have important impact on work in Indigenous communities (Bang & Medin, 2010; Bang et al., 2010; Bang, Marin, Faber, & Suzukovich, in press). Indigenous communities have not been in the decision-making roles in most aspects of formal education for generations. While there are important exceptions, the majority of suc- cesses and progress since the 1970s in communities have been at the adminis- trative level, not the classroom level (McCarty, 2009). The majority of Ameri- can Indian children both on and off reser vations have non-Indian teachers (McCarty, 2009). Language education has been distinctly different in this regard in that teachers have been primarily Indigenous people in the con- temporary efforts. Some scholars have argued that we are moving toward self- determination in Indian education (Tippeconnic, 1999, 2000). We suggest that language revitalization is a site of sur vivance—a cross between sur vival and resistance in which ongoing processes of cultural continuity and change unfold (Richardson, 2011; Vizenor, 2008).

There is a momentum of need and a gravity of action that are pulling this theoretical work together, not a single academic discipline. This is an exten- sion of what Hornberger (as cited in McCarty, 2003) calls “the creation of new ideology and implementation space” that are “carved from the bottom up” (p. 7). She is speaking about grassroots language activities that can become insti- tutional, specifically through policy. We build on this idea to further Native American language revitalization research methods, using the practical to carve out new theoretical space from shared experience.

Contextualizing Ojibwe Language Revitalization Efforts

We begin this discussion by examining the budding Ojibwe language immer- sion schools in the Minnesota and Wisconsin region. Second, as is typical in Ojibwe revitalization, the start of this language project was marked by certain protocols. Here we briefly look at the reciprocity expressed in these cultural protocols. Finally, we describe the making of the content for a material—a lan- guage learning software called Ojibwemodaa!1 Each of these three moments of knowledge production are then followed by analysis.

The heart of the process took place at a gathering of elders and learners at a series of camps where participants made short movies. Throughout we pose questions framed by DBR in order to reconstruct theory for language revital- ization. We reflexively ask: How might a participator y process intentionally restore Indigenous ways of learning? And how can DBR yield new directions for future revitalization interventions and designs?

Language Immersion Schools

The Ojibwe language is one of more than three thousand languages that may fall out of use within this centur y.2 Set mainly in the southeastern part of

386

Harvard Educational Review

the Ojibwe nation, our work focuses on eighteen small communities spread across five states. Currently there are an estimated seven hundred speakers of Ojibwe or Anishinaabemowin across the United States. Ojibwe, an Algonquian language also spoken widely in Canada, is considered “endangered” in the United States (see figure 1).

Across Ojibwe communities in northern Minnesota and Wisconsin, the use of immersion schools has expanded greatly in the past decade. Inspired by the success of Indigenous nations in New Zealand and Hawaii, immersion schools and language nests in this context are defined by using the Indig- enous language for all communication and all content taught, or 100 per- cent total immersion. Distinct from submersion in a language, the content and target language are thoughtfully scaffolded so learners will not be lost. At least four Ojibwe elementar y/preschool immersion programs have started in the past ten years: Waadookodaading Ojibwe Language Immersion School at Lac Courte Orielles, Wisconsin, started in 2001; Niigaane on the Leech

FIGURE 1 Map of current Ojibwe-speaking communities

Source: Charles J. Lippert. Adapted from the Wikimedia Commons file, “File: Anishinaabewaki.jpg” http://commons. wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anishinaabewaki.jpg

387

Designing Indigenous Language Revitalization hermes, bang, and marin

Lake Ojibwe reser vation in Minnesota; Enweyang Ojibwe Language Immer- sion Nest at the University of Minnesota Duluth; Red Cliff Headstart lan- guage nest; and Wicoie Nandagikendan, a combined Ojibwe/Dakota partial immersion program for early elementar y students, located in Minneapolis. Currently, immersion and master apprentice efforts are the best known and most popular strategies in Indigenous communities for creating fluent speak- ers (see, e.g., Rehyner & Lockard, 2009; Wilson & Kamana, 2001). The inten- sive effort around launching an immersion school, especially in an endan- gered Indigenous language, generates an urgency for developing speakers and designing technology that can hasten this process. We begin our analysis of context by looking critically at the role of immersion schools and the need for highly proficient speakers.

To date, there is a small but growing number of adults who have learned Ojibwe as a second language to a highly fluent level and consequently a short- age of Ojibwe speaker-teachers (J. Nichols, personal communication, January 2008). Geographically dispersed, the existing immersion schools and English- medium schools teaching Ojibwe as a second language struggle to find teach- ers who are both certified to teach and have proficiency in the Ojibwe lan- guage. In part due to a lack of learning opportunities and materials, those who have acquired proficiency usually have learned through a combination of a master/apprentice method, language classes, and teaching. With only a handful of young proficient speakers (not all of whom are teachers), there is an urgent need to condense the alleged five to six years it takes to make a heritage language learner highly proficient (B. Fairbanks, personal communi- cation, April 2012).

Nearly all public and tribal schools in this area offer Ojibwe language as a for-credit subject, yet immersion schools, by their nature, can only reach a small percentage of the population. For example, in the Waadookodad- ing immersion school, about thirty students, preschool through grade 4, are ser ved every year. In the neighboring border town and public schools, at least two hundred students are enrolled ever y year in the Ojibwe language pro- gram, and a majority continue in this program for six to twelve years. How- ever, second language teaching methods and materials for Indigenous lan- guages in U.S. public school classrooms are nearly nonexistent. Although the second language versus immersion methods debate is beyond the scope of this article, clearly there is a need for materials that can be used in both immersion schools and second language classrooms. In addition, a material that uses technology to make the practice time more efficient and effective is also needed to hasten the development of adult speaker-teachers. One of our hopes in this project is to figure out how to use technology to design materials that can propel a “quantum leap” in Indigenous language learning (Gardner, 2009, p. 86).

388

Harvard Educational Review

Bridging the Discourse Between School and Home

The concept of discourses here elucidates the tensions that arise when design- ing a school based in the Ojibwe language that also meets K–12 state academic standards. For Gee (1996), discourse is:

a socially accepted association among ways of using language, other symbolic expressions, and “artifacts,” of thinking, feeling, believing, valuing, and acting that can be used to identify oneself as a member of a socially meaningful group, or “social network” or to signal (that one is playing) a socially meaningful “role.” (p. 131)

Creating a curriculum that uses the Ojibwe language illuminates how nar- row the academic discourse of school is, and how this narrowness is a source of failure that has been identified, up to this point, as cultural discontinuity (Erikson & Mohatt, 1982; Gee, 2004; Heath, 1983; Phillips, 1972). Discourse attached to academic disciplines is often disconnected from place, shared meaningful localities and the ever yday lives of children and families (Gru- enewald, 2003; Hawkins, 2004; Schleppegrell, 2004). In contrast, Ojibwe revi- talization strives to reconnect the school, community, and land through the Indigenous language in very place-specific and localized ways. Would it be bet- ter to invent new Ojibwe words to describe educational, standardized concepts like “triangle” or to challenge the standards to accept the Ojibwe morphemes of shape?

Applied to Indigenous immersion schooling, using a school discourse in Ojibwe or any Indigenous language does not necessarily guarantee that lan- guages will then be spoken in homes (Fishman, 2000). That is to say, if you are taught second-grade math daily in Ojibwe, it does not follow that you can then go home and talk about fishing in Ojibwe to a grandparent or parent. More- over, it is unclear that you would “talk academic math” in any language in a home context. This disconnect comes from learning language in socially situ- ated contexts as well as moving from one discourse (e.g., school) to another (e.g., home). It is not just that the languages themselves are different (indeed, they may be the same), but, rather, the things we construct together through conversation and within a particular situation are different and meaningful depending on the context ( J. Gee, personal communication, March, 2008). The long-standing home-school cultural continuity gap is not just one of cul- ture but also of discourses. Viewed in this light, revitalization programs con- ducted within the school context can only be expected to be a partial solu- tion to language revitalization. Without socially situated contexts in which to speak the Indigenous language, schools can only attempt to create a one-way bridge to home. Immersion schools are not designed to teach adults to learn to speak the language at home, and things like standards and expert curricu- lum knowledge limit the curriculum re-creation process, which is regulated by state control, unless it is a private school. An exception to this may be pre- schools or language nests, which could be designed to use home discourse

389

Designing Indigenous Language Revitalization hermes, bang, and marin

and have proven effective in bringing language into the home when used con- currently with adult language-learning classes (Peter, 2007; Wilson & Kaman, 2001). The issues of language fluency, use, and transfer within and across semi- otic domains is partially rooted in the tensions expressed above that might be described as a fault line between second language acquisition and heritage language acquisition. An epistemological and design shift is needed—where the goals and purposes of design and material creation derive from, and are constituted by, the home and other informal domains.

If the goal of revitalization is intergenerational transmission in heritage mother tongues (Fishman, 2000; Hinton, 2009), how can technology and other materials be used to create or re-create discourses that could be useful outside of particular “school talk”? Two essential steps for creating materials for revitalization are to produce them in the community, making heritage lan- guage learners an active part of the process, and to capture language in con- text rather than to artificially construct language for teaching.

Reciprocity and Relational Epistemology

Language projects situated within an Indigenous community all have particu- lar, community-specific protocols that focus on reciprocity and relationality. In this project, for example, this meant engaging with elders and traditional cul- tural practices and belief systems through appropriate community protocols. In 2005 members of the research team went to Jessie Clark, a respected speaker and elder, to ask him to speak about what we were trying to do with technol- ogy and language. We showed Jessie video clips on our computers and talked about everyday conversation. He had a close relationship with one of our team members and liked what he saw. We were given several steps to take, including, for example, feasting ancestors alive and passed as a means to show respect and to ask for help, after which we were to begin to organize the people.

The ability to ask elders for this kind of direction calls into play a cultur- ally embedded practice as well as relationships within the oral tradition.3 The acts of engaging with elders and following traditional protocols establishes networks of meaningful relationships that ser ve as a form of validity. These are as valid as, and analogous to, peer review or checking references in West- ern scholarly research (Archibald, 1990; Dance, Gutiérrez, & Hermes, 2010). Framing the Ojibwemodaa! project within community implies reciprocity within relationships. This practice relies on the perspective of working in rela- tion to the language as opposed to a relationship of domination or objectifica- tion (Moore, 2006). According to Nelson (2002), language is an integral part of the law of reciprocity, and it is because of this value that most Indigenous peoples resist the notion that languages go extinct. Languages are alive and dynamic; they change, evolve, adapt, grow, shrink, mutate (p. 3).

The idea that Ojibwe and all Indigenous languages are alive extends and frames language work in a way that is not possible when we only imagine that

390

Harvard Educational Review

our languages are dying or that language is simply academic content. In order to proceed with language projects, we start with an acknowledgment of that relationship and continue to remind each other throughout the collaboration of this grounding. This is done, for example, through humor, offering food and tobacco, leaving room for flexibility and spontaneity, or being ready to turn off cameras whenever an elder requests it. This framework of relation- ship and reciprocity is embodied in practices of inclusion rather than hierar- chy and exclusion.

Documentation and Revitalization Although fairly well defined within the Ojibwe cultural context, these ideas of reciprocity and spirituality are challenged when moving across cultural con- texts. Actions stemming from reciprocity can bump into different priorities as dictated by linguistics, sometimes creating tension around priorities and decision making. For example, producing educational materials that are able to be distributed and consumed by learners immediately can seem to be in direct competition with approaches that embed documented conversations in sophisticated linguistic tools. In recording conversations for this project, the “documentation” perspective would drive us to record long conversations (one to three hours long), which then could take many hours to transcribe, anno- tate, and analyze. The more resources we devote to highly specialized tran- scription software and deeper linguistic analysis, the less time and resources we have for the creation of practical teaching materials, and the less accessible are the conversations for community consumption. The process of documen- tation and transcription specialization can systemically remove the language from use by community members, allowing only those employing high levels of academic discourse the ability to engage with knowledge production. In this instance, the revitalization perspective suggests recording shorter conver- sational videos (or ones that could be edited to around three minutes) more quickly and, basically transcribed, putting them into a user-friendly format and then distributing them immediately for use in classrooms or by learners.

Linguists, activists, and community members looking to create overlap between revitalization and documentation efforts have successfully found ways to traverse these competing priorities. By drawing on insights and tools from each perspective, these tensions can be strengths turned back into theory to redefine the fields of linguistics and second language learning. For example, more community members are receiving applied linguistics training, and more linguists are collaborating with speakers rather than simply using them as informants (see Francis & Gomez, 2009; Hermes, 2012; Hinton & Hale, 2001; Penfield et al., 2008). As researchers, teachers, and learners of Indigenous language engaged in the process of revitalization, we need to unearth and acknowledge points of potential disagreement emanating from different epis- temologies and find areas of convergence and opportunities for collaboration.

391

Designing Indigenous Language Revitalization hermes, bang, and marin

In this case, we set goals for both documentation and materials production. Because our process was an iterative one, we quickly incorporated insights back into the design of materials. For example, we reconsidered the idea of recording only first speakers of Ojibwe. Heritage language learners, who out- number speakers, were assigned an elder to work on recording long conver- sations to be transcribed for documentation purposes.4 Edited down, these same recordings were used to produce learning materials (including videos and flash cards for iPods). After a linguist suggested that all of the language generated at our camps was important, not just the fluent speakers within the same dialect, we started to record more broadly (Cowell, personal communi- cation, July 2010) and to reconsider an earlier decision to produce materials that were exclusively done by those who learned Ojibwe as a first language. This is a prime example of how iterative processes in DBR methodologies enable and encourage innovative changes and particular insights into design considerations as processes unfold.

Younger voices, new uses, and ways of learning an endangered language became a living part of our language and so, too, did the documentation of it. Another example of challenging linguistic practice is about dialects. Sec- ond language-learning pedagogy generally advises against confusing begin- ning learners with exposure to different dialects, although in our case many fluent speakers are at ease speaking across dialects. The debate about crossing dialects continues, as first speakers of Ojibwe diminish in numbers and second language learners are forced to learn to bridge dialects. Some critical teachers even question the idea of dialect difference and ask if this has become a con- structed boundary creating barriers for revitalization across different commu- nities (M. Norri, personal communication, August 2008). Although the idea of dialects has been an important one in the linguistics discourse, the speakers we brought together easily communicated across these nuanced differences, leaving our software with a model that represents shifting dialects.

Living Relationships In stressing living relationships, starting with the language itself and then extending to all of those who are involved in documentation and production, we run contrar y to a framework of “expertise,” authenticity, and exclusion. We argue that when a relational epistemology undergirds design processes, evidence of reciprocal relationships, including the many and varied roles that people play, surfaces in ways like those described above. As a group involved in production, we started to question foundational ideas like “dialects” and wonder about the practice of valuing some speakers more than others. Treuer (2001) quotes an eloquent elder, Joe Anginguash:

Haa ganabaj giwanitoomin, ikidong, “Anishinainaabe-izhichigeng giwani- toomin.” Gaawiin ganabaj i’iw anishinaabemowin gayaabi ayaamagad. Mii go giinawind eta go.

392

Harvard Educational Review

Like I heard one old gentle man say “we’re not losing our language, the lan- guage is losing us.” (p. 156)

This quote illustrates the relational way of thinking—that the language itself is not just subser vient to human control but lives beyond our control, and we are in relation to it. This shifts the dying/saving paradigm from one of victim/hero to one that is about a continually changing relationship, mak- ing clear that those involved in language revitalization have agency (see also Meek, 2011).

Ojibwe Movie Camps

We have discussed two different moments of revitalization; the immersion schools and cultural protocols—both of which informed our design decisions. We analyzed these to bring in relevant literature and extend this discussion beyond case specifics to more theor y for Indigenous revitalization. At this point, we look at the specific process of making the material: designing, cre- ating, and producing the content, at which point we examine the production process using the language of design research (Edelson, 2002). We discuss the emergent working principles for future designs and a learning theory about heritage language learning. This work can be thought of as working toward an ontological innovation (diSessa & Cobb, 2004; Sandoval, 2004), meaning the fundamental premises or underlying principles of the efforts shifted. For example, project principles shifted from language loss to living language, from documentation of fluent speech to engaging communities of meaning makers with variable mastery of language in processes, and from formalized content domains to discourses of home and informal life.

Since this is a reflection on the design process, not an evaluation of tool use (see Hermes & King, in press), we are not claiming that this is a tradi- tional design experiment but, rather, the evolution of a design. We used an existing technological tool and platform,5 which we did not alter or redesign but adapted to include content in the Ojibwe language. We developed origi- nal content through a participatory community process, creating short videos with audio and rerecorded audio, transcripts and translations, grammatical references, and additional information about the language.

Making and Producing Meaning The first constraint in the production process was coming to terms with the idea of language as content. Returning to the idea of socially situated lan- guage, the question shifted from how do we design content to how can we make and produce meaning together through the Ojibwe language? And how might this be expressed in learning material? Can we replicate or support con- versations that move back and forth in context and the spontaneous meaning making that is everyday oral language in use? Gee (2004) writes:

393

Designing Indigenous Language Revitalization hermes, bang, and marin

No one would want to treat basketball as “content” apart from the game in itself. Imagine a textbook that contained all the facts and rules about basketball read by students who never played or watched the game. How well do you think they would understand this textbook? How motivated to understand it do you think they would be? But we do this sort of thing all the time in school with areas like math and science. (p. 21)

In foreign language teaching, the assumption that “language alone” is being taught, or even can be effectively taught without a sociocultural con- text, is widely questioned (see, e.g., Kramsch, 1993.) Larsen-Freeman and Freeman (2008) point out that when a target language “is framed as content, the dynamic nature of language as a ‘system’ is artificially frozen, and so, too, sometimes are the practices of the people who use it in teaching” (p. 163). Gee (2004) says that words are never learned alone in isolation from meanings and social practices; one can memorize the meaning of a word, but in order to use it in communication, a process of engaging what you know with how to use it must also occur.

In reframing our goal from looking for content to developing a process that would yield potential content, we were facilitating a cultural production, or a cultural event that would yield a product (Hermes, 1995). In other words, what kind of a process could yield a more contextual language, a more living language? In moving away from the conjecture of language as content to living in rela- tionship with language, we were able to shift some of the previously described tensions around revitalization and documentation. Rather than selecting a predetermined content subject (e.g., hunting, beading, basket making) and translating language for that subject, we focused on the context of spoken ever yday language. Through the movie creation process we moved to con- sider two overlapping and coexistent processes—revitalizing a particular spo- ken domain of Ojibwe while generating learning materials. We also reflected on how both of these processes might yield something more generative.

Inclusive and Participator y Processes Embracing the idea of socially situated, ever yday language, we used a par- ticipator y process that included more than forty-five community members over a four-year period to playfully re-create everyday spoken language situa- tions. We held four Ojibwe movie camps in successive summers (2008–2010) and had smaller camps or gatherings throughout the year in order to create filming situations. After some failed attempts at scripting lines (elders don’t necessarily read Ojibwe, and scripts did not generate the kind of spontane- ous conversation we wanted), we moved to semi-scripting. Throughout the weeklong camp, different groups of people tossed around ideas, usually until something humorous came up. Then, we translated these ideas into scenes. We described these scenes to the elders, who made changes and suggestions, sometimes ahead of time and sometimes during the filming. We captured the video using this semi-script as a guide, but people improvised, saying exactly

394

Harvard Educational Review

what they wanted to say, within this frame. In this way, we generated stories together, everyone had some input, and every time we filmed it was different. We believe what we were doing was not so much just generating content as facilitating a generative event. This format made it possible to position com- munity members as producers of meaning while engaging them in language use in a way that was not replicating something predetermined.

These improvised movies became the content in the software, the tran- scripts of conversation populating all activities. Usually, in the production of the software in mainstream world languages, or even less commonly taught languages that are not endangered, these videos are scripted and enacted by actors. A source and translation file generates games, transcriptions, language grammar on demand, conversation and pronunciation practice, and the con- tent for the electronic flash-card tool. In our case, our process was backward, as we improvised movies and then transcribed, checked transcriptions, and created source files to be rerecorded. Captured film and transcriptions later became the basis for an archive of the conversations project.

The process of collaborating in a camplike environment generated ideas for creating these movies, opening up space for more decisions shared through the group. In fact, we re-created the use of ever yday speech domains at the camp, providing fertile ground for envisioning our semi-scripted events. We gathered together a small core of six to eight mostly Ojibwe-speaking people. The rest of the participants at our camps were community members, teachers, and learners at many levels, and all agreed to either keep quiet or stay in the Ojibwe language as much as possible. This created the feeling of a restored use of the Ojibwe language, made elders switch and stay in the Ojibwe language, and made for more opportunities for spontaneous joking and speaking.

This environment built on the language immersion camps, popular events that are sponsored by tribes and happen ever y summer throughout this area. These language immersion camps also attempt to re-create an everyday domain of use and help participants reimagine what it might be like to live in and through the language. But usually the sheer number of English speakers (most of the participants) keeps these language camps from being an immer- sive environment.

In our setting, where people camped and used Ojibwe exclusively, we cap- tured enough video to later produce nineteen, three to five minute movies as the content for Ojibwemodaa! Throughout the year, transcribers returned to work with the elders in the videos to attempt to accurately transcribe and doc- ument conversations. Released in March 2010, there are now more than 700 copies in circulation. One study of home-based use found that participants were able to use the software, with some support, to increase spontaneous use of Ojibwe in the home between generations (Hermes & King, in press). How- ever, as with other language learning software, the biggest obstacle still seems to be attrition (Nielson, 2011).

395

Designing Indigenous Language Revitalization hermes, bang, and marin

Retrospective Analysis

In this section we examine the production process at the Ojibwe movie camps to consider the potential needs and opportunities afforded by the use of a community-based design research methodology. Retrospective analysis allows us to connect the practical moments of understanding the problem in context back to literature and theory. In this way, insights gained from grappling with the problem of creating materials help us write theory for the larger revitaliza- tion movement.

Endangered language learners need to hear ever yday discourse in order to relearn and use conversation. The opportunity to use technology to bridge this gap between speakers and learners can bring the few fluent speakers avail- able into many different homes and provide a model of what spoken language could sound like.

The protean nature of technology affords us opportunities to be in rela- tion with language and to create and re-create language domains. Technology and the representations embedded within them can become “living objects” (Turkle & Papert, 1990). In reflecting on relationships to objects, Wilensky (1991) writes that “concreteness is not a property of an object but rather a prop- erty of a person’s relationship to an object. Concepts that were hopelessly abstract at one time can become concrete for us if we get into the ‘right relationship’ with them” (p. 198). In this way, technology might allow language learners to enter into certain kinds of relationships with language that are not abstract but, rather, allow for concreteness and meaning making.

Historically, Western modern forms of science and technology have been used to colonize and dominate Indigenous communities (Deloria, Deloria, Foehner, & Scinta, 1999). This legacy of Western technological forms con- tinues to be present in Indian countr y, and some scholars have suggested that technology and technology-based efforts in Indigenous communities are either implicitly or explicitly ser ving hegemonic functions (Salazar, 2002). Constructing effective learning environments will require that Indigenous technologies be engaged, valued, and nurtured rather than submerged under dominant technological hegemonies (Dyson, Hendricks, & Grant, 2007; Gins- burg, 2007; Salazar, 2007; Srinivasan, Becvar, Boast, & Enote, 2010).

Extending these ideas, we draw on Deloria and Wildcat’s (2001) reflections on indigenism, which Wildcat describes as:

a body of thought advocating and elaborating diverse cultures in their broadest sense—for example, behavior, beliefs, values, symbols, and material products— emergent from diverse places. To indigenize an action or object is the act of making something of a place. The active process of making culture in its broad- est sense of a place is called indigenization. (p. 32)

Working between these two theories, we suggest that ours is an indigenizing project. Repurposing technological tools for language revitalization opened

396

Harvard Educational Review

spaces for the integration of Indigenous epistemologies and axiologies in learning materials (Bang et al., in press). In this case, we repurposed tech- nological tools and objects—material creation in the service of language revi- talization. In the movie-making process, events that were commonplace were reimagined, became sources of inspiration for transformative praxis, and the community reengaged as meaning makers and producers.

Indigenous Epistemologies As discussed by Hermes (1995, 2005, 2007), the act of curriculum develop- ment and the pressure to create material products can be at odds with Indig- enous epistemologies. Recently, Richardson (2011) has further explored the containment of Indigenous epistemologies. Design research may help us to shift Indigenous educational work toward a focus on process rather than on the product of curricular materials. In this case, we worked to understand how the process of movie making and a focus on language learning shifts our focus away from content- and object-centered analysis toward relationality and reciprocity.

Including Communities This process also provides an example of taking curriculum (and knowledge) production back to the community level. In this way, the materials design proj- ect became a creative event involving community, not a static act of pulling language out of social context. Rather than trying to re-create culture, we were spontaneously creating, leaving room for stor y suggestions, and depending on improvised dialogues. We were intentionally reclaiming the “everyday” as culture, knowing that our aim was to produce something that would retain its fluid nature when put into the school context. As team members noted after we finished, the entire process could have been captured as a part of language documentation.

This process privileges community empowerment over production and marks a shift from communities as consumer to communities as producer. Theoretically, this also underlines the need to shift the paradigms away from approaching language revitalization and documentation as a process of resus- citation and hospice for a dying language (Amrey, 2009; Eisenlohr, 2004; Hin- ton, 2009; Mühlhäusler, 1996) and toward playful engagement and relation- ship building with a living language.

Guidelines for Design The foundational shifts we realized through this process were multilayered. Once we realized language was treated as “content” in the school setting, we began to shift our thinking to the idea of language as alive and of ourselves in relation to it. We also questioned the idea of teaching and learning language exclusively in schools, looking toward informal education as more appropriate

397

Designing Indigenous Language Revitalization hermes, bang, and marin

for restoring language’s use in homes. Approaching the production process as a community event where we used Ojibwe language meant that we re-created (at least temporarily) the ever yday, informal speech domain that is not cur- rently in use here. It meant that we were able to reimagine language being used all the time, aiming to re-create communication in Ojibwe as the norm.

Creating our own multimedia software for the Ojibwe language is an innova- tion that uncovers and simultaneously contradicts the highly political process of textbook creation and selection. Textbook creation has been something Native people have fought for long and hard, trying to identify and eliminate stereotypes, add multiple perspectives, or intervene in the textbook selection process (Cornelius, 1999). Much like the culture wars of the 1980s, misrepre- sentation and missing representations were on the front lines in the struggle to include and develop multicultural curriculum. We intentionally discussed and avoided representations or story lines that appeared frozen in time, used seasonal activities, romanticized our culture, or retold traditional wintertime stories. We talked about appropriating and creating modern variations on sto- ries, having elders engage in very contemporary or funny things together and focus on common activities, not specialized skills or traditional practices.

In this article we argue that a community-based design research method- ology that engages teachers and community members in the production and generation of learning materials moves toward integrating the levels of class- room, content, and pedagogy. We believe that this process of praxis is another step in reclaiming the classroom level of teaching and learning for Indige- nous children (Smith, 1999). Indigenous scholars have suggested that part of what is required in moving toward self-determination will be the reclaiming, uncovering, and reinventing of our theoretical understandings and pedagogi- cal best practices at the classroom level (e.g., Battiste, 2002; Bang, 2008) and at community-level events, as we have suggested here. Borrowing from Edel- son (2002), we ask: What kinds of lessons can we learn from the design pro- cess in DBR?

In challenging or innovative design, these decisions can be complex and as Schon pointed out, interdependent, requiring extensive investigation, exper- imentation and interactive refinement on the part of the designers. In these cases, the designers inevitably acquire substantial new understanding. (p. 108)

As we have argued, language is not content. Our epistemological founda- tions are deeply embedded in our languages; that is the core of what con- stitutes knowledge, knowing, and being. If language revitalization efforts approach language as content, while we may generate more adult speakers with proficiency in limited domains, we have little faith that our languages will be revitalized. It remains an open question whether—and, if so, how—the content of language revitalization efforts has been driven by this histor y. In our opinion, the epistemological underpinnings of formal education nation-

398

Harvard Educational Review

wide remain largely intact in most educational efforts even when they appear different, undoubtedly because the agenda of formal education in relation to Native people (and the economics and policies that unfold from it) remains fundamentally unchanged.

Conclusion

The need for more generative theor y for language revitalization cannot be overemphasized. The call for language revitalization began in discourses fraught with colonially imposed narratives of Indigenous loss of authenticity and has sent our communities into crisis modes. This loss narrative has fueled the documentation approach to language preser vation. Documentation has been the territory of anthropologists, where language becomes fetishized or fossilized. This approach has no theory of change that is of benefit to Native communities. It is up to communities to retool documentation efforts toward productive regeneration in communities. As we have described, moving to revitalize our languages and seeing them as living can open up creative pos- sibilities for communities, rather than generating only preser vation efforts. Skutnabb-Kangas (2008) argues that the problem with the idea of language death as a natural phenomenon glosses over the entire social political history of empire building that has given rise to a “no contest” choice to retain and use Indigenous languages. While we embrace thinking about our languages as living, both of these approaches (life or death) leave us in dichotomized ter- ritories that keep us in a polarized dialectic with colonial narratives.

The discourses of language genocide remain a crucial dimension of under- standing the unfolding impact of colonialism on Indigenous peoples. The lived experience for Indigenous children is akin to forced assimilation and lin- guistic servitude, the hegemonic power of monolingualism appearing to make the loss of the language the fault of the subjected. While there are communi- ties in which English has not claimed ownership, in many of our communities, children and families have no choice about the language they use in everyday speech.6 School, work, and the majority of our routine daily practices occur in the English domain. Deeply embedded in these practices are epistemological foundations in the service of the nation-state.

Revitalization efforts like the ones we describe in this article can and should intersect with documentation practices as well as immediate community-based materials production and distribution. These efforts begin to prioritize lan- guage in the home domain, not solely in schools, and strategically offer a con- tradiction to the deficit-victim narrative. In this way, the case of Indigenous language revitalization is a microcosm of schooling at large, fundamentally challenging assumptions about knowledge creation and production that have limited the scope of whose knowledge is produced and reproduced in schools and communities.

399

Designing Indigenous Language Revitalization hermes, bang, and marin

Notes 1. See Cotter’s (2002) review of Irish Now! for a technical and descriptive analysis of the

same software used in the making of Ojibwemodaa! 2. Approximately 3,000 of the world’s 7,000 languages are currently spoken by fewer than

10,000 people (Maffi, 2011). See Krauss (1998) for a detailed analysis of loss or Maffi (2005) for a detailed review of world Indigenous language loss as related to biocultural diversity.

3. Research in Indigenous communities often begins with having a place or relationship within the community so the elder can place the researcher in terms of land/physical place or relationship to people he or she knows. So while not necessarily a blood rela- tion, the researcher is somehow “known” or placed within a network.

4. Although assigning advanced learners to transcription was a more time-consuming way to transcribe the conversations, it was an invaluable language learning opportunity for the participants. This work is supported by a generous grant from the National Science Foundation, DEL grant number 0854473.

5. The language learning software was provided by a company called Transparent Lan- guage, which partnered with the Indigenous nonprofit Grassroots Indigenous Multime- dia in order to create Ojibwemodaa! (Hermes, 2010).

6. Maffi (2003) notes that this is not a real choice, as if there were equal and competing options. Choosing to devote intellectual capital to an endangered Indigenous language invokes power and privilege when there is not enough wider social economic infra- structure to support this choice. When Indigenous people have seen their means of subsistence replaced with a cash economy that is a fragmented kind of labor not associ- ated with place, land, or culture, the “choice” to use an Indigenous language for com- munication and cash-related work is often not a real option or choice at all.

References Amer y, R. (2009). Phoenix or relic? Documentation of languages with revitalization in

mind. Language Documentation & Conservation, 3(2), 138-148. Archibald, J. (1990). Coyote’s stor y about orality and literacy. Canadian Journal of Indian

Education, 17(2), 66–81. Bang, M. (2008). Understanding students’ epistemologies: Examining practice and meaning in com-

munity contexts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University, Evan- ston, IL.

Bang, M., Marin, A., Faber, L., & Suzukovich III, E. (in press). Repatriating indigenous technologies in an urban Indian community. Urban Education.

Bang, M., & Medin, D. (2010). Cultural processes in science education: Supporting the nav- igation of multiple epistemologies. Science Education, 94(6), 1008–1026.

Bang, M., Medin, D., Washinawatok, K., & Chapman, S. (2010). Innovations in culturally- based science education through partnerships and community. In M. Khine & I. Saleh (Eds.), New science of learning: Cognition, computers and collaboration in education (pp. 569–592). New York: Springer.

Battiste, M. (2002). Indigenous knowledge and pedagogy in First Nations education: A literature review with recommendations. Saskatchewan, Canada: Apamuwek Institute.

Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and method- ological issues. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42.

Cornelius, C. (1999). Iroquois corn in a culture-based curriculum: A framework for respectfully teaching about cultures. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Cotter, C. (2002). Review of Irish Now! Language Learning and Technology, 6(2), 34–40.

400

Harvard Educational Review

Dance, L. J., Gutiérrez, R., & Hermes, M. (2010). More like jazz than classical: Reciprocal interactions among educational researchers and respondents. Har vard Educational Review, 80(3), 327–352.

Deloria, V., Deloria, B., Foehner, K., & Scinta, S. (1999). Spirit & reason: the Vine Deloria, Jr., reader. Golden, CO: Fulcrum Publishing.

Deloria, V., & Wildcat, D. (2001). Power and place: Indian education in America. Golden, CO: Fulcrum.

Demmert, W., & Towner, J. (2003). A review of the research literature on the influences of culturally based education on the academic performance of Native American stu- dents. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

diSessa, A. A., & Cobb, P. (2004). Ontological innovation and the role of theory in design experiments. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 77–103.

Dyson, L. E., Hendriks, M. A. N., & Grant, S. (2007). Information technology and indigenous people. Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.

Edelson, D. C. (2002). Design research: What we learn when we engage in design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 105–121.

Eisenlohr, P. (2004). Language revitalization and new technologies: Cultures of electronic mediation and the refiguring of communities. Annual Review of Anthropology, 33, 21–45.

Erikson, F., & Mohatt, G. (1982). Cultural organization of Joe structures in two classrooms of Indian students. In G. Spindler (Ed.), Doing the ethnography of schooling (pp. 132– 174). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Fishman, J. A. (1991). Reversing language shift. London: Multilingual Matters. Fishman, J. A. (Ed.). (2000). Can threatened languages be saved? Reversing language shift revis-

ited: A 21st centur y perspective. London: Multilingual Matters. Francis, N., & Gomez, P. (2009). Documentation and language learning: Separate agendas

or complementary tasks? Language Documentation and Conservation, 3(2), 176–191. Gardner, H. (2009, May–June). Personalized education: A quantum leap in learning will

allow everyone to go to the head of the class. Foreign Policy, 172, 86. Gee, J. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.). Bristol, PA:

Taylor & Francis. Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. New York:

Routledge. Ginsburg, F. D. (2007). Rethinking documentary in the digital age. Cinema Journal, 46(1),

128–133. Gruenewald, D. A. (2003). Foundations of place: A multidisciplinary framework for place-

conscious education. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 619–654. Gutiérrez, K. D., & Vossoughi, S. (2010). Lifting off the ground to return anew: Mediated

praxis, transformative learning, and social design experiments. Journal of Teacher Edu- cation, 61(1–2), 100–117.

Hawkins, M. (Ed.). (2004). Language learning and teacher education: A socio-cultural approach. Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual Matters.

Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life and work in communities and classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Henze, R., & Vanett, L. (1993). To walk in two worlds—or more? Challenging a common metaphor of Native education. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 24(2), 116–134.

Hermes, M. R. (1995). Making culture, making curriculum: Teaching through meanings and iden- tities at an American Indian tribal school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin–Madison.

Hermes, M. (2005). Ma’iingan is just a mis-spelling of the word wolf’: Ojibwe language and culture in the context of schooling. Anthropology and Education, 36 (1), 43–56.

401

Designing Indigenous Language Revitalization hermes, bang, and marin

Hermes, M. (2007). Moving toward the language: Reflections on teaching in an indigenous- immersion school. Journal of American Indian Education, 46(3), 54–71.

Hermes, M. (Executive producer). (2010). Ojibwemodaa! Learn Ojibwe now. Nashua, NH: Transparent Language; Hayward, WI: Grassroots Indigenous Multimedia. Retrieved from http://www.grassrootsindigenousmultimedia.org

Hermes, M. (2012). Indigenous language revitalization and documentation in the United States: Collaboration despite colonialism. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6(3), 131–142.

Hermes, M., & King, K. (in press). Ojibwe language revitalization, multimedia technology and family language learning. Language Learning and Technology.

Hinton, L. (Februar y 2009). Language revitalization at home. Paper presented at the Inter- national Conference on Language Documentation and Conser vation, Honolulu. Retrieved from http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/handle/10125/10612

Hinton, L., & Hale, K. L. (Eds.). (2001). The green book of language revitalization in practice. San Diego: Academic Press.

Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Krauss, M. (1998). The condition of Native North American languages: The need for realis-

tic assessment and action. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 132(1), 9–22. Larsen-Freeman, D., & Freeman, D. (2008). Language moves: The place of “foreign” lan-

guages in classroom teaching and learning. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 147–186.

Lippert, C. J. “Location of all Anishinaabe Reservations/Reserves in North America, with diffusion rings about communities speaking an Anishinaabe language. Cities with Anishinaabe population also shown. (Rev. 3)” 2007-04-18. Adapted from the Wikime- dia Commons file, “File: Anishinaabewaki.jpg,” at http://commons.wikimedia.org/ wiki/File:Anishinaabewaki.jpg

Maffi, L. (2003). The “business” of language endangerment: Saving languages or helping people keep them alive? In H. Tonkin & T. Reagan (Eds.), Language in the twenty-first centur y: Selected papers of the millennial conferences of the Center for Research and Documenta- tion on World Language Problems (pp. 67–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Maffi, L. (2005). Linguistic, cultural and biological diversity. Annual Review of Anthropology, 34(29), 599–638.

Maffi, L. (2011). The case for linguistic diversity. Terralingua Landscape, 8(2). McCarty, T. L. (2003). Revitalising Indigenous languages in homogenising times. Compara-

tive Education, 39(2), 147–163. McCarty, T. L. (2009). The impact of high-stakes accountability policies on Native American

learners: Evidence from research. Teaching Education, 20(1), 7–29. Meek, B. (2011). Failing American Indian languages. American Indian Culture and Research

Journal, 35(2), 43–60. Moore, R. E. (2006). Disappearing, Inc.: Glimpsing the sublime in the politics of access to

endangered languages. Language and Communication, 26(3–4), 296–315. Mühlhäusler, P. (1996). Linguistic ecology: Language change and linguistic imperialism in the

Pacific region. London: Routledge. Nelson, M. (2002). Introduction: Indigenous language revitalization. Revision, 25(2), 3–4. Nielson, K. B. (2011). Self-study with language learning software in the workplace. Language

Learning and Technology, 15(3), 110–129. Penfield, S., Serratos, A., Tucker, B., Flores, A., Harper G., Hill, J., & Vasquez, N. (2008).

Small languages and small language communities. International Journal of Sociology, 191, 187–202.

Peter, L. (2007). “Our beloved Cherokee”: A naturalistic study of Cherokee preschool lan- guage immersion. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 38(4), 323–342.

402

Harvard Educational Review

Phillips, S. (1972). Participant structures and communicative competence: Warm Springs children in community and classrooms. In C. Cazden, V. Johm, & D. Hymes (Eds.), Functions of language in the classroom (pp. 370–394). New York: Teachers College Press.

Reyhner, J. A., & Lockard, L. (Eds.). (2009). Indigenous language revitalization: Encouragement, guidance and lessons learned. Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University Press.

Richardson, T. (2011). Navigating the problem of inclusion as enclosure in Native culture- based education: Theorizing shadow curriculum. Curriculum Inquir y, 41(3), 332–349.

Salazar, J. F. (2002). Activismo Indígena en América Latina: Estrategias para una construc- ción cultural de tecnologías de información y comunicación. Journal of Iberian and Latin American Studies, 8(2), 61–79.

Salazar, J. F. (2007). Indigenous Peoples and the Cultural Constructions of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Latin America. In L. E. Dyson, M. Hen- dricks, & S. Grant (Eds.), Information Technology and Indigenous People. (pp. 14–26). Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.

Sandoval, W. A. (2004). Developing learning theory by refining conjectures embodied in educational designs. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 213–223.

Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Mah- wah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2008). Linguistic genocide in education—or worldwide diversity and human rights? Delhi, India: Orient Blackswan.

Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. London: Zed Books.

Srinivasan, R., Becvar, K. M., Boast, R., & Enote, J. (2010). Diverse knowledges and contact zones within the digital museum. Science, Technology & Human Values, 35(5), 735.

Tippeconnic III, J. (1999). Tribal control of American Indian education: Observations since the 1960s with implications for the future. In K. Swisher & J. Tippeconnic (Eds.), Next steps: Research and practice to advance Indian education (pp. 3–52). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document # ED 427 902)

Tippeconnic, J. W. (2000). Reflecting on the past: Some important aspects of Indian edu- cation to consider as we look toward the future. Journal of American Indian Education, 39(2), 39–47.

Treuer, A. (Ed.). (2001). Living our language: Ojibwe tales and oral histories. St. Paul: Minne- sota Historical Society Press.

Turkle, S., & Papert, S. (1990). Epistemological pluralism: Styles and voices within the com- puter culture. Signs, 16(1), 128–157.

Vizenor, G. R. (2008). Survivance: narratives of Native presence. University of Nebraska Press. Wilensky, U. (1991). Abstract mediations on the concrete and concrete implications for

mathematics education. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism (pp. 193–204). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Wilson, W., & Kamana, K. (2001). Mai loko mai o ka ‘i’ni: Proceeding from a dream, the ’Aha Punana Leo connection in Hawaiian language revitalization. In L. Hinton & K. Hale (Eds.), The green book of language revitalization in practice (pp. 147–176). San Diego: Academic Press.

With gratitude we thank our senior colleagues, Allen Luke and James Gee for their insight- ful comments on early drafts of this piece; and Bryan Brayboy, who organized the research symposium that started this collaboration. We dedicate this piece to Kolajo Afolabi, Mary’s first cousin and editorial board member for HER. Kolajo, I think of you with every bit of research I do that may lead to more social justice in this world.

This article has been reprinted with permission of the Har vard Educational Review (ISSN 0017-8055) for personal use only. Posting on a public website or on a listser v is not allowed. Any other use, print or electronic, will require written permission from the Review. You may subscribe to HER at www.har vardeducationalreview.org. HER is published quarterly by the Har vard Education Publishing Group, 8 Stor y Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, tel. 617-495- 3432. Copyright © by the President and Fellows of Har vard College. All rights reser ved.

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

1

“He Said It All in Navajo!”:

Indigenous Language Immersion in Early Childhood Classrooms

Louise Lockard and Jennie De Groat Northern Arizona University

U. S. A.

This paper describes the historical and social foundations of the Navajo Headstart Immersion program. The researchers have worked as teachers, teacher educators, and parents in these programs. They reflect on the need for new partnerships among tribes, tribal colleges and universities to prepare teachers and to develop curriculum materials for Indigenous language immersion programs.

Introduction History of Navajo Schooling

Early Childhood Opportunities for American Indian Children Culture and Language

Conclusion References

One day a parent came to the center and said, “Thank you for teaching my child Navajo. Yesterday my son wanted to feed the dogs some food that he didn‟t eat. He was actually calling to the dogs and telling them to come over and eat. He said it all in Navajo!” The mother said that she was so amazed and almost started to cry. She was caught off guard and could not believe that he was making sentences. When she asked her son what it was that he said to the dogs, he replied with a smile, „I called the dogs to eat.‟ As a teacher I was proud to learn that the children were learning the Navajo language. I knew that the full immersion program was effective.

-Caroline Wagner (teacher)

Introduction

This paper describes the historical and social foundations of the Navajo Headstart Immersion program and the success of the program from 1995-2000. The authors have worked as teachers, teacher educators, and parents in these programs. They reflect on the need for new partnerships among tribes, tribal colleges, and

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

2

universities to prepare teachers and to develop curriculum materials for Indigenous language immersion programs.

The history of formal education for the Indigenous peoples of the Americas as well as the Indigenous peoples of the Pacific—New Zealand, Australia, and Hawaii— parallels the history of the formal education of the Navajo people. In New Zealand, the Native Schools Act of 1887 made English part of all government schools (Ovando, 1996). In Hawaii, the Hawaiian language was banned in public and private schools between 1886 and 1986 (Kamana & Wilson, 1997). In Canada, the Indian Education Act of 1876 began a policy of forced assimilation and separation from their families for Canadian children who were speakers of aboriginal languages (Burnaby, 1996). In the United States, in 1868, the Indian Peace commission ordered, “Schools should be established, which children should be required to attend; their barbarous dialect should be blotted out and the English language substituted” (Indian Peace Commission, 1868). In each setting, efforts to revitalize the Indigenous language come from an understanding of the history of formal education in colonial times as well as an understanding of efforts by teachers, parents, and community members to gain autonomy in the education of their children. This history has not been included in traditional teacher preparation programs. Teachers in early childhood settings need information about successful program models, teaching strategies, and materials. They need to discuss the funds of knowledge in their communities that motivate parents to transmit their language and culture to their children, and they need to establish settings in the community where children are immersed in their home language.

The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights guarantees parents the “right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children" (United Nations, 1992). The rights of Indigenous peoples are further guaranteed by the 1992 Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic Religious and Linguistic Minorities which guarantees that “states shall protect the existence and the national or ethnic, cultural, religious and ethnic identity of minorities within their respective territories and shall encourage conditions for the promotion of that identity” (United Nations, 1992).

In New Zealand, in the 1980s, the effort to reverse language shift began in the early childhood setting with the institution of the kohanga reo (literally means “language nests”). Today 14% of the Maori population speak the Maori language well or very well (King, 2008). In 1983 Hawaiian educators founded the Punana Leo preschools which provided full-day 11-month schools with a model of full immersion in the Hawaiian language (Kamana & Wilson,1996). In the Canadian community of Cold Lake, Alberta, projects to reverse language shift include an immersion day care and the Canadian Head Start program (Blair, Rice, Wood, & Janvier, 2000).

We recognize that these teachers work within the borders of state and federal language policies that have defined their students‟ learning opportunities. These borders have existed for the Navajo people since the introduction of formal education with the signing of the treaty of 1868. For teachers of Navajo language and culture today, these borders take the form of current legislation to impose standards-based

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

3

curriculum on schools and to limit the language of instruction for English Learners.

History of Navajo Schooling

In 1819 the U.S. Congress established a “civilization fund” to introduce the “habits and arts of civilization” among the Indians (Prucha, 1975, p. 33) This policy led to the foundation of the manual labor boarding school in 1834 at the Choctaw Academy in Kentucky, where half the day was spent in academic instruction and half the day was spent in vocational instruction, as well as the first reservation boarding school at Fort Simcoe, Washington Territory. By 1848, 16 manual labor schools were in operation and seven were under construction. The Carlisle Indian Industrial School was founded in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, by Captain Richard Henry Pratt who ordered teachers to speak only in English. Pratt‟s goal of assimilation did not end with the loss of the students‟ native language. He ordered students to cut their hair, dressed them in military-style uniforms, and ordered them to select a new name from a list written on the chalkboard. Students marched in military companies from the dormitory to the classroom and marched to work and to meals. On Saturday evenings Pratt lectured the students at English-speaking meetings.

This assimilationist model of the industrial boarding school would serve as a model for schools on the Navajo Reservation in Arizona. In 1863 Navajo men, women, and children had been forced to march over 400 miles from their homeland to a reservation at Ft. Sumner in the Bosque Redondo on the Pecos River in southeastern New Mexico. General Carleton ordered the construction of classrooms for 800 Navajo children on the premise, claiming, “The education of these children is the fundamental idea on which we must rest all hopes of making the Navajo a civilized and a Christian people” (Carleton as cited in Woerner, 1941, p. 15). In 1868 the Navajos signed a treaty with the federal government which allowed them to return from Ft. Sumner to parts of their former territory in New Mexico and Arizona. The treaty of 1868 described the purpose of education:

In order to insure the civilization of the Indians entering into this treaty, the necessity of education is admitted, especially of such of them as may be settled on said agricultural parts of this reservation, and they therefore pledge themselves to compel their children, male and female, between the ages of six and sixteen years to attend school. (US Congress, 1868, cited in Terrell, 1970, p. 222)

In 1869, President Ulysses S. Grant, in a shift from a policy of war with the Indians to a policy of peace, appointed a board of Indian Commissioners to supervise the appointment of Indian agents, teachers, and farmers (Reyhner & Eder 2004). The board, which answered directly to the war department, divided Indian agencies among 13 different religious groups, The Navajo tribe was assigned to the Presbyterian board of missions.

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

4

In the 1930s, changing attitudes towards the role of the Navajo language in the classroom led to the publication of the first Navajo language readers. The 1928 Meriam report recommended the adoption of reading materials that “…have some relation to Indian interests, not merely Indian legends…but actual stories of modern Indian experiences” (Meriam, 1928, p. 372). John Collier was appointed Commissioner of Indian Affairs in 1933. His policy reform efforts led to the use of native language literacy for reading instruction in the classroom. Collier appointed Willard Beatty, president of the Progressive Education Association, to serve as director of Indian education. Beatty established programs in bilingual education, adult basic education, Indian teacher training and in-service education (US Congress 1969). Beatty wrote, “It is desired that the Indians be bilingual, fluent and literate in the English language and fluent in their vital, beautiful and effective native languages” (Indians at Work, 1935, p. 35-36). From 1933-1945, bilingual books, textbooks, dictionaries, and films were developed, including a series of Navajo primers and bilingual folk tales including Who Wants to be a Prairie Dog, and the Little Herder Series. A monthly news magazine Adahooniligii (Events) was printed with a partial English translation. The magazine was printed on a single sheet of newsprint and posted in trading posts and chapter houses.

The history of Navajo education reflects changes in federal policy toward the Navajo language. Title VII of the ESEA Act of 1965 brought the first funding for bilingual education for economically disadvantaged Indian students in public schools. In 1966 funds were provided for students in federal schools. This legislation was important in the development of Navajo literacy as it provided financial resources to implement the production and dissemination of Navajo language materials in contract schools.

Rough Rock Demonstration School which opened on July 27, 1966 was the first school to be governed by an all-Indian locally elected board. The school was regarded “not just as a place for educating Indian children, but as the focus for development of the local community” (US Congress, 1969, p. 20). There was an emphasis on community control of the school. In the classroom, students were exposed to a bilingual-bicultural curriculum. Director Robert Roessel (1977) wrote, “We want to instill in our youngsters a sense of pride in being Indian. We want to show them that they can take the best of each way of life and combine them into something visible” (1977, p. 91). In 1983 Rough Rock Demonstration School adopted a new bilingual-bicultural curriculum based on the NAMDC inquiry-based social studies curriculum which followed a spiraling sequence of culturally relevant topics beginning with the Navajo concept of “ke‟e” (kinship) (McCarty, 1991). The Rough Rock Demonstration School thus provided a model for contract schools that were locally controlled and that became centers for the development and dissemination of Navajo language curriculum materials.

Government policy has evolved to allow native peoples to read and write in their language. In Indian Nations at Risk (1992) Linda Skinner voices the demand for native language instruction while acknowledging the new direction of the Federal Government:

On October 30, 1990, President Bush signed Public Law 101-477. Title I of that bill is the Native American Language Act. This act preserves, protects and promotes the rights and freedom of Native Americans to use, practice and develop Native

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

5

American languages. Among other things, it recognizes the rights of natives to use their languages as a medium of instruction. (p. 55)

Schools are institutions which reflect the knowledge and assumptions held by educational authorities about the prior knowledge of students from the majority language group (McGroarty, 1986). Most education is based on systematic research on the development and experiences of these majority language speakers (Heath, 1986). For education to be appropriate to the experiences of Navajo students, we must focus our attention on significant background and learning factors particular to the development of these students (McGroarty,1986). Teachers must actively seek to understand the backgrounds of these students in order to plan effective instruction for them. They must recognize the rich knowledge students bring to school with them (Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez, 1992). The contextual knowledge of language minority students, rather than being impoverished, deficit or different, is rich and multicultural (Pease-Alvarez & Vasquez, 1994).

The Native American Language Act of 1990 recognizes that “there is convincing evidence that student achievement and performance, community and school pride, and educational opportunity is clearly and directly tied to respect for, and support of, the first language of the child or student” (U.S. Congress, 1990 PL 101-477 Sec.102(6)) The Esther Martinez bill, which was enacted by Congress in December 2006, is an amendment of the Native American Language Act of 1990, which authorizes competitive grants to establish language nests and language immersion programs for children ages birth-7 and their parents. The passage of this bill, following 14 years of deliberation in the Congress, serves as an invitation to discuss the history and the current situation of Indigenous languages in early childhood programs and to reflect on systemic change in schools to support this model (U.S. Congress, 2006).

The Navajo education policy states, “The Navajo language is an essential element of the life, culture and identity of the Navajo people” (Navajo Tribe, 1984,10 N.N.C. § 111 )The Navajo Nation places great value on a Navajo specific education that supports the self-identity of its teachers and students (Navajo Tribe, 1996, 2003a, 2003b, 2003c). A 1991 survey of 4,073 Navajo Head Start students found that 53.3% spoke only English, 17.7% spoke only Navajo, and 27.9% spoke both Navajo and English (Platero, 2001). Teacher educator Bernard Spolsky (2001) writes of the influence of the school in disrupting intergenerational language transmission:

Seemingly protected by its isolated geographical position and by the formal recognition of its autonomy as a Nation, the Navajo people were denied any real control of the one institution, schooling, which can play a central role in a campaign to reverse language shift. With this lack of autonomy came a language shift which disrupted intergenerational language transmission. (p. 157)

These statistics indicate a need to include instruction in Navajo language in all schools serving Navajo students, an alarm echoed in the literature on Indigenous language loss. (Appel & Muysken 1987; Bauman 1980; Krauss, 1996; McCarty, 1998, 2005; Nettle & Romaine, 2000).

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

6

Early Childhood Opportunities for American Indian Children

Support for Navajo language programs in the schools is further documented in a survey of 242 schools on the Navajo Reservation to which 1,222 Navajo classroom aides and 2,474 aides of all types responded. The Diné Division of Education found that Navajo language and education is a legitimate part of the educational program (Navajo Tribe, 2003c). Research in Navajo communities demonstrates that place- and community-based curriculum and instruction supports students‟ academic success (Rosier & Holm, 1980; McLaughlin, 1992; Goodluck, Lockard, & Yazzie, 2000; Zehr, 2007; Pavel, Reyhner, Avison, Obester,& Sayer, 2003; Wilson, 2003).

Yazzie-Minz (2005) reviewed formal early childhood educational opportunities for American Indian and Alaska Native children. She questioned the relevance of these formal preschool programs for parents and children. Diaz Soto and Swadener (2002) call for educators to rethink their reliance on a strictly scientific worldview; Rogers and Swadener (1999) ask, “Whose narrative are heard here, and who benefits from these practices?” (p. 439). This question is important if we are to effect systemic change to implement Navajo immersion in the Headstart curriculum (DeJong, 1999; Cahape & Demmeret, 2003; Slate, 1993).

Nissani (1993) found that, for preschoolers who were speakers of other languages, “to promote the healthy self-esteem of each and every young child, early childhood programs must be thoughtfully designed to serve both parents and children-- all the more so for those who speak a language other than English at home” (p. 2). Diaz-Soto and Swadener (2002) agree:

It is clear that it will be crucial for the field to continue to critically analyze how privilege and power have influenced the direction of the field toward the scientifically driven epistemologies and valorized the rationalistic Western lens. Who stands to benefit from the over reliance on Western ways of seeing the world? Why has it been so difficult for the field to examine its own presuppositions? (p. 55)

We believe that the study of history deconstructs this rationalistic Western lens and engages teachers in a process of transforming their classrooms and schools. Eder (2007) calls for research which considers the practices we use in education in this effort to examine Western assumptions.

With this cautionary note and with a belief that teachers are agents of change in their institutions only when they understand these relations of power, we begin a discussion of the history of Navajo Headstart Immersion from 1995-2000. This discussion began in a junior level writing course at Northern Arizona University: “BME 331W: Structured English Immersion in Early Childhood Settings.” In class we discussed methods for teaching young English Learners. Two of the students, Eilene Joe and Caroline Wagoner, were Navajo Headstart teachers; another student, Judy DeHose, was a school board member who was interested in preparing bilingual teachers for a new immersion program in her community on the White Mountain Apache

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

7

Reservation. The Navajo Headstart Immersion program was supported by a grant from the Administration for Native Americans from 1995 to 2000. This discussion led to a review of current efforts to teach Navajo in the Headstart program and to reverse language shift in Indigenous communities.

Culture and Language

Caroline Wagner worked as a Navajo Headstart teacher in Rough Rock in the Chinle Agency in 1995. She reflects:

The Navajo Nation Department of Head Start has grown from serving 199 children in 1965. Dr. Robert Roessel was a part of getting Head Start started here on the Navajo Reservation. At the time Dr. Roessel proposed that teachers stay at the dorms at ASU through the summers to go through training. Dr. Roessel always stressed Navajo language and culture. He always asked, “How would you feel if you lost your language?”

Former Navajo Nation President Mr. Albert Hale issued an executive order in July 1995 establishing the Navajo language as the primary means of instruction in all Headstart classrooms. This order decreed, “Navajo language shall be the medium of instruction for Navajo children, the Nation‟s future at all Head Start facilities…the Department of Head Start, Division of Education, shall herewith implement, beginning with the Fall Semester 1995, the purpose and intent of this order in the curriculum, teacher education, facilities, extracurricular activities and all other relevant facets of the Navajo Head Start program” (Navajo Tribe, 1995).

Later that year the Headstart Navajo language curriculum was developed and field tested. During the years 1995-1996, this special project was coordinated by Mrs. Afton Sells from the Office of Diné Culture, with Chinle as the pilot site. Two hundred and fifty students were enrolled in the pilot project. This curriculum integrated the wisdom of traditional Navajo teaching with the day-to-day planning and activities in the current Headstart program. The children learned stories and songs. They learned about plants and animals by the seasons. They used concrete objects and their five senses to explore the world around them. Parents and elders understood the significance of early childhood, and the elders believed all the knowledge and experience gained in the early years would stay with the child throughout their lives. The curriculum that was developed incorporated the wisdom of traditional teaching and learning for young children with the current Head Start program and learning environment.

Eilene Joe interviewed Dr. Wayne S. Holm in December 2006. Dr. Holm was part of the Navajo Nation Language Project funded by the Administration for Native Americans in partnership with the Navajo Nation Division of Diné Education, which developed the curriculum for the Navajo Nation Headstart program. Holm described the curriculum, which included Situational Navajo. He described how Situational Navajo is supported by theories of second language acquisition and discussed how second language is more than just being exposed to the language; it is the ability to

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

8

communicate in situations in which the child receives feedback (Holm & Silentman, 1997; Holm, Silentman, & Wallace, 2003).

Joe also interviewed Afton Sells in December, 2006, at Diné College in Tsaile, Arizona. Afton Sells was the Education Specialist for the Headstart Immersion Program. She supervised four full immersion classrooms in the Chinle Agency. Sells reported that in the Immersion program children were exposed to the Navajo language from the time the child got on the bus to the time the child got off the bus. The Navajo language was used in all communication with children and teachers in the classroom. Children were immersed in the Navajo language in every interest area and learning situation. Sells reported to Eilene Joe that when children are taught the Navajo language at an early age they have more confidence in themselves.

Caroline Wagner discussed the beginning of the immersion program in Rough Rock.

I worked with Head Start for a number of years. Our site was chosen to operate a full immersion program. That was an experience for all of us. The instruction was all in the Navajo language. The students would remind each other to speak in the Diné language. Diné keji. It was incredible to hear them say “diné keji”. In the beginning it was a little difficult to constantly use Navajo while teaching throughout the day. Sometimes we would catch ourselves speaking English. The children that attended school during the years the full immersion program was being used learned a lot of Navajo. They would try to make sentences and could understand when someone spoke to them in Navajo.

Wagner introduced a thematic unit on geography or Diné Tah (meaning “among the people”) with a lesson on the colors associated with the four sacred mountains that mark the boundaries of Diné Tah (Arthur, Bingham, & Bingham, 1982). Wagner reflects:

Students at Rough Rock learned the four sacred mountains, their colors, the directions and what the mountains represented I had to do a lot of hands-on activities in order for them to understand the mountains and their colors. For example, we would go on a nature walk and collect different colored rocks. We would search for white, turquoise, yellow and black. The children would try to find rocks that were the same color as the four sacred mountains. If they couldn‟t find one by the time we got back to the center, the children would use paint to color the rocks that they found. After that the students would glue it onto a cardboard. They would use dirt to make models of the four sacred mountains. The children enjoyed putting their homes in the middle. With this activity the children learned that they lived within the four sacred mountains.

In Headstart the directors and teachers strive to achieve the goals of the program. The mission statement for Navajo Nation Headstart is “Life is a journey not a destination.” It is a journey that is not traveled alone. The development of the child is influenced by the world around him, Mother Earth, the air, water, and light as well as the family, the community and every individual around him. Even though this journey may lead the child beyond the boundaries of the four sacred mountains, the child will continue to be protected by the foundation provided by these elements and the child will work in beauty. Just as one will cross the path

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

9

of the child in the future we will strive to prepare the Navajo child, the family and the community for the challenges of the future and stability from the past.

The mission of the Navajo Department of Headstart is to strive to be a positive and integrating influence in this process. The curriculum was developed with this mission statement in mind. The Navajo basket was used to symbolically represent the curriculum, with the seasons as a framework for the learning activities of young children. The basket incorporates the four directions and the blessings and teaching of the 12 Holy People as they relate to the four seasons. The basket also carries the symbol of the four seasons and the four original words of the Navajo Language and the four stages of life and the human cycle.

The curriculum consisted of Situational Navajo and the Diné Curriculum, a curriculum designed by Navajo Nation Headstart. Several years after this Diné Curriculum was implemented, the Department of Health and Human Services wanted all Head Start programs to have a research-based curriculum. The Ade‟e‟honiszin Curriculum was created. The Ade‟e‟honiszin curriculum is a curriculum made up of the Diné Curriculum and the Creative Curriculum (Navajo Tribe, n.d.). Although the Creative curriculum recognizes the value of the home language of the child, Dodge (2002) argues,

Bilingual children make the transition to decoding words well. Bilingual children are often very creative and good a problem solving. Compared to children who speak one language, those who are bilingual can communicate with more people, read more and benefit more from travel. Such children will have an additional skill when they enter the workforce. (p. 39)

While acknowledging the reality of bilingual education, Eilene Joe critiques the shift of the contemporary Navajo Nation Head Start toward English-dominant literacy:

Today in some Headstart classrooms English is the language of instruction while in other classrooms the Navajo language is used for enrichment. Since 2000 when No Child Left Behind and Early Reading First were implemented, there has been a shift to the use of more English for literacy. This is where the Navajo Nation Head Start made the mistake in teaching more English.

As teachers reflect on this history and understand the need to support the Immersion model in their classroom, policy makers must continue to support curricular reform which includes the Navajo language and culture.

Conclusion

A discussion of the success of the Navajo Headstart Immersion Project from 1995-2000 must include an understanding of the failure of current programs to support full academic success for American Indian students. In 2006, 30% of the 184 Bureau of Indian Education schools made Adequate Yearly Progress as defined by No Child Left

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

10

Behind. In Arizona 55% of the 141 public schools on Reservations made Adequate Yearly Progress (Zehr, 2007).

As Judy DeHose, a school board member from Navajo county says:

The most difficult task for the endangered Native American language would be the development of curriculum in the native language. It is even more difficult because of the “English Only” laws that have been passed by many states. Bilingual programs are no longer funded. It takes money to train teachers who are fluent in the native language but are also certified in teaching all subject areas in the native language. It takes money to develop and print materials for a true Immersion program. I know that some tribes are years ahead in developing materials that are relevant to their culture and language but as the funding sources dried up for bilingual programs, they have come to a standstill. (A personal conversation with DeHose, 2007)

The Navajo Headstart Immersion Program has been successful because of the professionalism of the teachers, the strength of the curriculum which was based on current theory, and the vision of a future which included the Navajo language and culture in the community. Yazzie-Mintz (2005) calls for “partnerships among …tribes, tribal colleges, and universities,” concluding that “Strong partnerships create sustained opportunities to create longitudinal studies of early education and provide the means to include research-based recommendations in local, regional, and national policy” (p. 34). These partnerships included Diné College, Northland Pioneer College, Central Arizona College, Northern Arizona University, and Arizona State University where teachers completed both AA degrees and bachelor‟s degrees in Early Childhood Education. What will strengthen the Navajo Headstart Immersion program is to structure activities in the centers so that children acquire Navajo through “doing Headstart” in Navajo. We must work with parents to empower children to acquire Navajo in settings beyond the Headstart center.

References

Appel, R., & Muysken, P. (1987). Language contact and bilingualism. London: Edward Arnold.

Arthur, C., Bingham, J., & Bingham, S. (1982). Between sacred mountains: Navajo stories and lessons from the land. Chinle, AZ: Rock Point Community School.

Bauman, J. (1980). A guide to issues in Indian language retention. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.

Blair, H., Rice, S., Wood, V., & Janvier, J. (2000). Daghida: Cold Lake First Nation works towards Dene language revitalization. In B. Burnaby & J. Reyhner (Eds.). Indigenous languages across the community (pp. 89-98). Flagstaff: Center for Excellence in Education, Northern Arizona University.

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

11

Burnaby, B. (1996). Aboriginal language maintenance, development, and enhancement: A review of literature. In G. Cantoni (Ed.). Stabilizing Indigenous languages (pp. 21-36). Flagstaff: Center for Excellence in Education, Northern Arizona University.

Cahape, P., & Demmeret, W. G. (2003). American Indian and Alaska Native early childhood health, development and education research. (Report No. EDO-RC- 030012). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Crawford, J. (1994). Endangered Native American languages: What is to be done and why? Bilingual Research Journal, 19(1),17-38.

DeJong, D. H. (1999). Is immersion the key to language renewal? Journal of American Indian Education, 37(3) 31-46.

Diaz Soto, L., & Swadener, B. (2002). Toward a liberatory early childhood theory, research and praxis: Decolonizing a field. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 3(2) 38-66.

Dodge, D. (2002). The creative curriculum for preschool. Washington, DC: Teaching Strategies.

Eder, D. J. (2007). Bringing Navajo storytelling practices into schools: The importance of maintaining cultural integrity. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 38(3), 278-296.

Giroux, H. (1992). Border crossings: Cultural workers and the politics of education. New York: Routledge.

Goodluck, M., Lockard, L., & Yazzie, D. (2000). Language revitalization in Navajo/English dual language classrooms. In Learn in beauty: Indigenous education for a new century (pp. 9-20). Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University.

Heath, S., B. (1986). Sociocultural contexts of language development. In Beyond language: Social and cultural factors in schooling language minority students (pp. 143-186). Los Angeles, CA: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center.

Holm, W., & Silentman, I. (Eds.). (1997). Situational Navajo: The specific language used in recurring situations by Navajo Head Start teachers and children. Window Rock, AZ: Navajo Nation Language Project Navajo Tribe, Division of Diné Education.

Holm, W., Silentman, I., & Wallace, L. (2003). Situational Navajo: A school-based, verb- centered way of teaching Navajo. In J. Reyhner, L. Lockard, O. Trujillo, & R. Carrasco ( Eds.). Nurturing Native Languages (pp. 25-52). Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University.

Indian Peace Commission (1868). Report of Indian Peace Commissioners from the Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for the year of 1868 Washington D.C. :Government Printing Office 97-2 at 16-7. In Reyhner, J. (2008). Promoting human rights through Indigenous language revitalization Intercultural Human Rights Law Review (3).

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

12

Indians at Work (1935, March 15). Washington, D.C.: Office of Indian Affairs. [Reprint of an editorial in Aw-O-Tham Ah-Pa-Tac (Papago Progress)

Kamana, K., & Wilson, W. H. (1996). Hawaiian language programs. In G. Cantoni (Ed.) Stabilizing Indigenous languages (pp. 153-156). Flagstaff, AZ: Center for Excellence in Education Northern Arizona University.

King, J. (2008). Language is life: The worldview of second language speakers of Maori. In J. Reyhner & L. Lockard (Eds.) Indigenous language revitalization: Encouragement, guidance and lessons learned (pp. 97-108). Flagstaff, AZ: Center for Excellence in Education Northern Arizona University.

Krauss, M. (1996). Status of Native language endangerment. In G. Cantoni. (Ed.). Stabilizing Indigenous languages (pp. 16-20). Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University.

McGroarty, M.(1986). Educator‟s response to sociocultural diversity: Implications for practice. In Beyond Language: Social and cultural factors in schooling language minority students (pp. 299-343). Los Angeles, CA: Evaluation, Dissemination and Assessment Center.

McCarthy, T. L., Benally, A., Lynch, R. H., & Wallace, S. (1991). Classroom inquiry and Navajo learning styles: A call for reassessment. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 22(1). 42-45.

McCarty, T. L. (1998). Schooling, resistance, and American Indian languages. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 132. 27-41.

McCarty, T. L. (Ed.). (2005). Language, literacy and power in schooling. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.

McLaughlin, D. (1992). When literacy empowers: Navajo language in print. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

Meriam, L. (Ed.). (1928). The problem of Indian administration. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching; Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31. 132-141.

Navajo Tribe Division of Diné Education (1984). Navajo Nation education policies. Window Rock, AZ: Division of Diné Education.

Navajo Tribe Division of Diné Education (July 19, 1995). Executive Order Title X. Window Rock, AZ: Division of Diné Education

Navajo Tribe Division of Diné Education (1996). Diné culture and language curriculum framework. Window Rock, AZ: Division of Diné Education.

Navajo Tribe Division of Diné Education. (2003a). Diné language standards. Window Rock, AZ: Division of Diné Education.

Navajo Tribe Division of Diné Education. (2003b). Diné culture-based curriculum. Window Rock, AZ: Division of Diné Education.

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

13

Navajo Tribe Division of Diné Education. (2003c). The Navajo Nation teacher education initiative and SITE. Window Rock, AZ: Division of Diné Education.

Navajo Tribe Division of Diné Education (n.d.). Ade‟e‟honiszin Doleel curriculum. Window Rock, AZ. Division of Diné Education.

Nettle, D., & Romaine, S. (2000). Vanishing voices. London: Oxford University Press.

Nissani, H. (1993). Early childhood programs for language minority students Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Language and Linguistics. Retrieved from ERIC Database (ED355836)

Ovando, C. (1996). Knowledge construction, language maintenance, revitalization, and empowerment. In J. Banks, (Ed.) Multicultural education: Transformative knowledge and action (pp. 297-322). New York: Teachers College Press.

Pavel, M. Reyhner, J., Avison, C., Obester, C., & Sayer, J. (2003). American Indian & Alaska Native education research agenda literature review. [Commissioned paper prepared for American Indian & Alaska Native Education Federal Interagency Task Force]. Rockville, MD: Westat.

Pease-Alvarez, C., & Vasquez, O. (1994). Language socialization in ethnic minority communities. In F. Genesee (Ed.). Educating second language children (pp. 82- 102). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Platero, P. (2001). Navajo Head Start language. In K. Hale & L. Hinton, L (Eds.). The green book of language revitalization in practice: Toward a sustainable world (87- 100). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Prucha, F.P. (1975) Documents of the United States Indian Policy. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

Reyhner, J., & Eder, J. (2004). American Indian education: A history. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Rogers, L., & Swadener, B. (1999). Reframing the “field.” Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 30, 436-440.

Roessel, R. (1977). Navajo education in action: The Rough Rock Demonstration School. Chinle, AZ: Navajo Curriculum Center Rough Rock Demonstration School.

Rosier, P., & Holm, W. (1980). Bilingual education series: 8; The Rock Point experience: A longitudinal study of a Navajo school program (Saad Naaki Bee Na‟nitin). Washington DC: Center for Applied Linguistics (ED 195363)

Skinner, L. (1992). Teaching through traditions: Incorporating native languages and cultures into curricula. In C. Howley & P. Cahape (Eds.). Indian Nations at risk: Listening to the people (pp. 54-59). Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools (ED 339588)

Slate, C. (1993). “On reversing navajo language shift.” Journal of Navajo Education, 10(3), 30-35.

Vol. 12, No. 2 International Journal of Multicultural Education 2010

14

Spolsky, B. (2001). Prospects for the survival of the Navajo language: A Reconsideration in Proceedings of the 2001 Athabaskan Language Conference University of California Los Angeles, May 18-20, 2001.

Terrell, J. (1970). The Navajos. New York: Harper and Row.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights, GA Res. 217A, at 71, UN GAOR, 3 rd

Sess., 1 st

plen mtg., UN Doc A/810.

United Nations. (Dec. 18,1992). Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic Religious and Linguistic Minorities, GA Res. 47/135, Annex, UN Doc. A/Res/47/135/Annex.

U.S. Congress. (1969). Indian Education: A national tragedy—a national challenge 91 st

Congress, 1 st Session Report 91-501.

U.S. Congress. (1990). Native American Language Act PL 101-477.

U.S. Congress. (2006). Esther Martinez Native American Languages Preservation Act PL 109-39.

Wilson, S. (2003). Reclaiming Indian education through partnerships with engaged institutions. In Engaged Institutions: Impacting the Lives of Vulnerable Youth Through Place Based Learning (pp. 39-52). Washington, DC: The Rural School and Community Trust.

Woerner,D. (1941). Education among the Navajo: An historical study. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Columbia University, New York.

Yazzie-Mintz, T. ( 2005). Early childhood educational opportunities for American Indian and Alaska Native children and families. In E.F. Shores (Ed.), Proceedings of the rural early childhood forum on American Indian and Alaska Native early learning (pp. 16-37). Retrieved April 1, 2010 from http://www.ruralec.msstate.edu/

Young, R. (1977). Written Navajo: A brief history. In J. Fishman (Ed.). Advances in the creation and revision of writing systems (pp. 459-470). The Hague: Mouton.

Zehr, M. (2007). A culture put to the test. For Navajo children, a rigorous program draws on traditions to spur achievement. Education Week, 26(28), 25-28.

Copyright of International Journal of Multicultural Education is the property of International Journal of

Multicultural Education (IJME) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a

listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or

email articles for individual use.