Archived Information

Advocating for Culturally Congruent School Reform

A Call to Action for Title IX Indian Education Programs & Parent Committees

Abstract This article discusses school reform from a cultural perspective. It speculates that a primary reason why Indian students continue to suffer higher dropout rates and lower achievement is because a "dissonance" exists between American Indian culture and the culture of our public schools system. It suggests that certain kinds of teaching methods and school reform strategies are more "culturally congruent" with traditional tribal teaching practices and therefore should be considered for adoption among public schools serving Indian student populations. Title IX programs are urged to become involved in the school change process and to advocate for culturally congruent teaching practices as an effective strategy for achieving high standards for American Indian and, indeed, all students.

INTRODUCTION

As we move into the fifth year of the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 (IASA), many schools are struggling to help their students achieve high standards. State departments of education are designating some schools as "in need of improvement" and requiring them to re-examine their improvement plans. Many of these schools are eagerly searching for better methods of teaching their American Indian students. Title IX program staff and parents have an opportunity and responsibility to help schools identify and adopt reforms that have the best chance of success.

Since the passage of the Indian Education Act of 1972, Indian education programs have worked to improve success rates among American Indian students in public schools by addressing their "culturally relevant academic needs" as described in the law. The exact meaning of this phrase, referred to among Indian educators with the acronym of "CRAN," has never been clearly defined. For the most part, Title IX programs across the nation have worked to identify and meet the academic deficiencies and social problems prevalent among American Indian students and their families. Despite their fine efforts, American Indian students, on average, continue to register higher dropout rates and lower achievement. The time has come to look less at the students and more at the public school system itself for the source of the problem. Indeed, the problem may be cultural at its very core, stemming from a dissonance between the cultures of American Indian communities and the public school system.

CULTURALLY CONGRUENT TEACHING STRATEGIES

The dissonance between Indian and mainstream teaching practices has existed at least since Colonial times. Consider the following quotation by an Iroquois leader named Canasatego. In June of 1744, the commissioners of Maryland and Virginia sought to entice the Six Nations of Iroquois into a treaty by offering to educate a number of Indian boys at William and Mary College. The next day, Canasatego, speaking for the Iroquois, gave the following reply.

"We know that you highly esteem the kind of learning taught in those colleges and that the Maintenance of our young Men while with you would be very expensive to you. We are convinced, therefore, that you mean to do us Good by your Proposal; and we thank you heartily. But you who are so wise must know that different Nations have different Conceptions of things and you will, therefore, not take it amiss if our Ideas of this kind of Education happen not to be the same as yours. We have had some Experience of it...

"We are however not the less oblig'd by your kind Offer tho' we decline accepting it; and, to show our grateful Sense of it, if the Gentleman from Virginia will send us a Dozen of their Sons, we will take great care of their Education, teach them all we know and make Men of them."

Some might scoff at the suggestion that such an "Indian Education" might be preferable to a college education. However, if we consider tribal educational methods during Canasatego's time, we might find several virtues. Tribal societies integrated education into everyday life, allowing children to work both individually and in cooperative groups where they could share their accomplishments. Most importantly, children learned by doing, and their lessons were often immediately applicable in their lives.

Ironically, these attributes of traditional Indian teaching are reflected in some of the leading innovative teaching strategies of the school reform movement. Today, educators identify these practices as effective methods of teaching but have given them new names:

People who remember the days when Indian children were taken from their homes to give them a proper education in boarding schools will appreciate the irony of this return to tribal teaching practices.

THE SOURCE OF DISSONANCE

Perhaps the primary source of cultural dissonance in teaching lies in the nation's middle and high schools that employ an "industrial model" of organization. For decades, American Indian students have languished in this system that has tried to educate students with industrial efficiency. This model reflects the cultural values of industrial/corporate America-values that have always been at odds with the culture of Indian America both in and out of school. It was developed under the premise that skills and content were best taught if they were broken down into separate disciplines such as math, English, and science. The notion is that, as a student moves through the system, his or her education is to be assembled and manufactured by a team of experts. On the surface, the concept is appealing. Unfortunately, it has not worked for a great number of students across the nation. For American Indian students, the system has been devastating by failing to engage them and then labeling them as poor learners.

The great disadvantage to this system is that these separate and isolated disciplines are most often not clearly related to any sort of "real-life" application. Students must acquire the content of the lessons through abstract lecture, memorization, and drill. Too often, the content learned from this system is lost to the student shortly after the final test.

Teachers are also inhibited by the system. They are often forced to use a "cookie-cutter" lesson plan format that must be taught in discrete 45-minute segments. They must focus on curriculum content that most easily lends itself immediate "measurement." In-depth examination and understanding of curriculum topics are often sacrificed in order to assure that all topics are touched upon during the school year. These conditions stifle many teachers' creativity and enthusiasm.

THE DEFICIT APPROACH

Since the late 1940s and early 1950s, we have seen the evolution of standardized testing as a powerful force in determining school policy and practice. There is a strong, well-entrenched public belief is that these tests are sophisticated and precise enough to identify all the discrete skills and concepts that are necessary for a well-rounded education. Over the years, there has evolved a damaging misuse of these instruments. Public schools serving American Indian students often use these tests to identify academic deficiencies and place lower-performing students into remedial classes where they are drilled on basic skills. Thousands of Indian students have been relegated to remedial classes or special education. In some districts, the percentage of Indian students referred to special education has approached 25 percent.

The factory model, coupled with the use (and misuse) of standardized tests, has had a devastating effect on American Indian student populations. We have unintentionally taught generations of American Indian students (along with a sizeable percentage of the general population) that going to school means days of boring drill, punctuated by weekly testing traumas. These culturally incongruent practices, which are prevalent in so many public schools, may be among the root causes of the high American Indian dropout rates. If that is true, then it will be necessary for schools to adopt a fundamentally different approach to teaching. But what sorts of innovations and changes should committees be looking for? The answer may lie in examining some aspects of traditional tribal teaching practices. The figure below illustrates a broad direction in which schools serving American Indian students might move in adopting more culturally congruent teaching strategies.

Industrial Model Culturally Congruent
Discrete Disciplines --} Integrated Curricula
Classroom Lecture --}Applied Learning
Contrived Lessons --}Authentic Experience
Individual Competition --} Group Competition

These changes should not be considered an absolute recipe for success. Rather, we are seeking to urge schools to adopt innovations that are intended to capture students' attention, imagination, and participation. If we are to meet the goal of high achievement for all students, we must be able to get many more students to be deeply engaged in their schoolwork. To the degree schools are able to make students' work directly relevant to their lives, then better the chance that more students will become engaged longer.

The suggestion here is not that schools should forsake classroom lecture forever or completely abandon all remedial programs. Rather, the idea is for the school staff to seek alternative and innovative teaching strategies to better engage students in learning activities. Student engagement is a critical element necessary for success, and these culturally congruent teaching practices are very effective ways to engage students.

THE CURRENT CLIMATE OF CHANGE

While most schools have adopted some degree of change, the pace has been slow. Perhaps this should not be surprising in light of the complex problems schools face today. Conflicting priorities, an overcrowded curriculum, and diverse student needs are just a few of the challenges. The result has been that many of the changes adopted by schools thus far have been relatively small and incremental in nature and, consequently, have not resulted in significant changes in teaching practice or student outcomes.

As mentioned above, IASA requires each state to monitor the progress of its schools to determine which ones are "in need of improvement." The law also requires state education departments to help these schools review and revise their local school improvement plan and acquire parental and community involvement as part of the process. Since many Title IX programs have developed well-organized parent committees over the years, these groups have an excellent opportunity to advocate change in district policy and teaching practice.

Among many other Title IX roles and responsibilities, it is important that Title IX staff work to assure that parent committee members are well informed on the progress of Indian students within the district and promising practices in teaching. Title IX parent committees advocating for school change must avoid making premature or uninformed judgments. Simplistic answers like "back to basics" are often attractive at first glance. An uninformed committee will not realize they are advocating for more of the same "drill-and-kill" methods that have plagued our school system for so long. It is therefore important that Title IX programs consider the alternatives for the future in light of the past 25 years of effort to improve Indian education.

REFLECTING ON WHERE WE'VE BEEN

As mentioned above, public schools across the nation have approached Indian education by trying to identify the academic deficiencies and prevalent social problems of American Indian students and their families. Indeed, educational institutions around the country have conducted extensive research to identify "factors" within the Indian communities that are barriers to success.

Over the years we have come to learn many reasons why Indian children as a group don't succeed in public schools. Many studies have concluded that Indian families lack sufficient reading material in their homes and that Indian students enter school without knowing their colors or the letters of the alphabet. They and their families don't place appropriate value on education and suffer from alcohol, drug, and other social problems and so on. After awhile, the barriers begin to seem insurmountable. Indeed, the prevailing wisdom in some districts has been that educational improvement for Indian students as a group cannot happen until such problems are alleviated.

And yet, there is ample evidence that disadvantaged children can and do achieve under the right conditions. Under IASA, schools adopt innovations and other changes that are intended to improve teaching and learning. However, there is no recipe or prescriptive plan that directs schools toward one strategy or another. As has been suggested above, some strategies are probably more effective than others in teaching Indian students.

With this in mind, perhaps it is time for Title IX Indian Education programs and parent committees to look at CRAN from another perspective. Let's look at the public school system itself from a cultural perspective. Maybe Indian students don't need tutoring so much as more effective teaching methods throughout the school. It is time for districts serving American Indian populations to emulate, as much as possible, traditional teaching methods of tribal societies.

As schools wrestle with difficulties of implementing change, they are confronting a confusing array of recommended strategies and models for change. There is a strong tendency toward adopting changes that are less traumatic to the system. Often, some sort of catalyst is needed to initiate profound change. Under IASA, Title IX programs are considered an integral part of the larger district program. Therefore, Title IX parent committees have a responsibility to advise district administrators and educators regarding the Indian student population as a whole.

A well-informed, articulate, organized group of parents can be a most effective agent for change in the public school system. Parents are able to advocate for children in ways that Title IX staff members cannot. They need not be inhibited by office protocols or the legitimate concern staff may have about damaging professional relationships within the district. Parents may question school policy and advocate for change at the highest level of administration. After 25 years of trying to fix Indian students and their families, the time has come for us to fix the system.

Robey J. Clark, Associate
NWREL's Comprehensive Center for Region X

Authors note--The premises and arguments offered in this essay are not based upon any rigorous educational or anthropological research studies. Rather, they are based upon 15 years of experience as an Indian Education program director and three years experience in NWREL's Region X Comprehensive Center. Readers will have to consider the merits of the argument in light of their own experience and intuition. I would like to acknowledge Joseph Coburn, Robin Butterfield, and Floy Pepper whose work with NWREL's Research and Development Program for Indian Education helped lay a foundation for this paper. RJC