Native American Communities React to NCLB

The National Indian Education Association, in conjunction with the Center for Indian Education at Arizona State University, has released “Preliminary Report on No Child Left Behind in Indian Country,” a collection of the testimony of teachers, parents, students, administrators, school board members, and tribal leaders gathered at 11 hearings held across the country. These hearings, analogous to those held by the Public Education Network for a broader audience, were part of an effort to understand the impact of NCLB on American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian (“Native American”) students and their specific educational needs. The report represents only a first step; the NIEA and ASU intend to analyze further the testimony and to consult policy experts in making a thorough set of recommendations for erasing the negative impact of NCLB on the Native American community.

Testing

As in so many other communities, many representatives of the Native American community heralded NCLB as a law that would finally call attention to the serious deficiencies in their educational system. In reality, however, the law has proven burdensome. Witnesses emphasized the ineffectiveness of using just one test to measure academic achievement. They cited the common argument that children do not all learn the same way, and noted that most Native American communities deal with many of the problems that rural schools have encountered, including small schools (with tiny sample sizes), high teacher turnover, and insufficient social resources. Many witnesses expressed frustration over the way the assessment system placed blame on the shoulders of individual students and detailed how these students internalized responsibility for their schools' failure.

Teaching

Native American communities also share with rural communities a constant shortage of qualified teachers and a dearth of local programs through which teachers can feasibly earn the “highly qualified” designation. In addition, many witnesses noted the unique pedagogical talents and sensitivities necessary for teaching Native American students, who have different cultural values, different backgrounds, and often different language needs. They criticized the law not only for failing to create mechanisms by which their communities could attract, train, and retain such teachers, but for creating an onerous accountability system that was adding to already high rates of teacher turnover.

Funding

Witnesses from Native American communities, like all parties affected by NCLB, noted the glaring lack of funding provided by the federal government for implementation of the law. Though these communities are amongst the most impoverished in the nation, their schools are held accountable for mandated student scores without receiving any assistance in helping equip students with basic social services, healthcare, or even food. The increased testing requirements and demand for more math and English instruction have stripped funding from other programs at struggling schools.

Culturally Based Education and Title VII

This lack of funding hits the Native American community especially hard because of the unique needs of its students. Many tribal governments and Native American activists have worked hard to ensure that Native American students receive a strong culturally-based education that includes immersion into their native language and culture. In addition to stripping schools of funding for art, music, and social studies, the requirements of NCLB leave virtually no resources for the programs that have proven so useful and necessary in Native American communities.

These programs are theoretically protected and funded through Title VII of NCLB, but many witnesses reported that Title VII funding was becoming synonymous with Title I funding, which should be directed towards programs for at-risk students. The demographics of Native American students make their need for Title I interventions especially high, and often the Title VII protections are trumped in order to ensure that these students reach state standards in English and math.

Role of Tribal Governments

One of the most profound observations of witnesses at the NIEA hearings was the gradual erosion of tribal sovereignty over Native American education. Though the schools on reservations and tribal land should be run by the tribal government, NCLB has imposed its requirements onto these schools, and forced them to cooperate with state governments, effectively eradicating any unique cultural or social components that these schools might have provided.

The witnesses emphasized that NCLB has been imposed upon the Native American community without taking the Native American perspective into account. The community's particular and dramatic needs merit the specific attention of bureaucrats, but until now Native American voices have not been included in policymaking. Undoubtedly the final report from the NIEA and ASU will attempt to develop a workable system of interchange that will allow federal regulations to have more relevance in Native American communities.

Prepared by Nelly Ward, October 12, 2005