HISTORY OF INDIAN EDUCATION Overview From the first attempts at educating American Indians, the goal has been to change them. The Jesuits attempted change by acquainting the Indian with the French manner, French customs, and French language. The Protestants tried to Anglicize Indians and prepare them for a "civilized" life. The Franciscans worked to bring Indians into the mainstream by making them missionaries. Schools were established as further attempts at "civilizing and converting" the natives. Every attempt at changing the American Indian and, now, the Alaska Native has met with failure or minimal success. Early approaches at changing the American Indian are explained in an 1899 statement by a top government Indian affairs official: "The settled policy of the government is to breakup the reservations, destroy tribal relations, settle Indians upon their own homesteads, incorporate them into the national life, and deal with them not as nations and tribes or bands, but as individual citizens. The American Indian is to become the Indian American... As this statement makes clear, Indian education policies have historically had two thrusts: isolation and assimilation. Both these thrusts have been challenged by Indian people: "Indians today are deeply concerned with getting effective and relevant education for their children. They want the educational system to reflect tribal values and their way of life, and they feel they ought to influence and exercise control over this education." 1 Said Chief Joseph in 1879: "If the white man wants to live in peace with the Indian, he can live in peace. There need be no trouble. Treat all men alike. Give them all the same law. Give them all an even chance to live and grow. All men were made by the same Great Spirit Chief. They are all Brothers. The earth is the mother of all people, and all people should have equal rights upon it. . . .Let me be a free man-free to travel, free to stop, free to work, free to trade where I choose, free to choose my own teachers, free to follow the religion of my fathers, free to think and talk and act for myself-and I will obey every law, or submit to the penalty." The Federal Government Federal policy toward American Indians and Alaska Natives has historically forced assimilation for the purpose of divesting Indians of their land and resources. Federal authorities often sought to achieve this policy by trading treaty provisions on education in exchange for the ceding of Indian lands. Schools were established as agents for spreading Christianity and transmitting Western culture and civilization. From the beginning, the curriculum in Indian schools offered no Indian languages, culture, or history. There was no recognition that culture and land are interrelated-and that removing the people from their land and denying them their culture would take away their very essence and destroy them. In exchange for Indian land and trade concessions, the U.S. assumed a protective role that developed into a "trust relationship." Trust is generally defined as "the unique legal and moral duty of the United States to assist Indians in the protection of their property and rights." Trust has as its primary purpose the continued survival of Indian tribes and their governments. The trust relationship existing between the federal government and Indian tribes governs that special, unique relationship between the United States government and Indian nations. The source of the trust relationship varies depending on the individual Indian nation. It can be a treaty or an executive order, a statute, or a court decision. The "trustee" in the relationship is the U.S. Congress. The various Indian nations are the "beneficiaries." U.S. courts have used the trust relationship to justify the special powers of Congress in Indian affairs. Congress has exercised unrestricted power in Indian affairs, enacting legislation directly affecting-and often interfering with-the internal affairs of Indian nations.2 According to the American Indian Policy Review Commission,3 the fundamental authority for this power was set in 1789 by the U.S. Constitution, which conveyed to the federal government the power to regulate commerce with Indian tribes, to make treaties with them, and to control public lands occupied and reserved for them. The Constitution recognized the fundamental right and legality of Indians' desire for a permanent separate identity as a people. "The trust relationship" has existed between the U.S. government and the American Indian ever since. The trust responsibility has been defined through laws and court decisions. In administering this trust, federal agencies are responsible for preserving, protecting, and guaranteeing Indian rights and property. In order to do so, they must deliver a wide range of services to Indian people. All federal programs for Indians share two purposes: they fulfill specific treaty provisions and they fulfill a general commitment to the Indian tribes to improve their social and economic conditions. As the original inhabitants of the United States, Indians also claim rights accruing to no other group of Americans: "These rights are based on treaties signed between individual tribes and the Federal Government between 1778 and 1871, acts of the U.S. Congress to implement the treaties and provide for the general welfare of Indian people, court decisions upholding the validity of treaties, and special legislation to deal with Indian matters." 4 The initial Indian treaties tried to convert the Indians from hunters to farmers. Farmers would require less land-leaving more for settlement by white settlers. "The treaty period, from 1778 to 1871, provided the framework for future relationships between the U.S. and the Indians in which the Federal responsibility to educate Indians became more apparent." 5 About 400 treaties later, the U.S. had acquired almost a billion acres of Indian land. Indian nations lost both their autonomy and their means of livelihood. To compensate, the federal government offered training on how to sustain life on farm plots averaging 160 acres per family and promised the Indians health services and schools. By 1882, many Americans recognized that the federal government had failed to fulfill its treaty obligations. By the 1880s, Indian survival had become an issue confronting the Congress.6 Treaties between Indian tribes and the U.S. government recognized and protected the special rights of the nations who signed them. The United States made treaties with Indians to end wars and acquire more land. Many treaties contained educational provisions about providing schools, money, and teachers. At the same time, Indian governments used treaties to confirm and retain the sovereign right of self-government, fishing and hunting rights, and jurisdictional rights over their own lands. Treaties stood as evidence that Indian nations were sovereign and independent.7 Every so often, Indians and their plight came to the attention of the American general public. In 1928, the most significant investigation ever conducted in the field of Indian affairs-the Meriam Report-was published. Among its major findings: "Indians were receiving a poor quality of services (especially health and education) from public officials who were supposed to be serving their needs." The report suggested that public schools, with their traditional curriculums, were not the answer: "The Indian family and social structure must be strengthened, not destroyed. The qualifications of teachers in Indian schools must be high, not poor to average. The federal school system must be a model of excellence."8 A generation later, in 1961, Secretary of the Interior Udall appointed a Task Force on Indian Affairs. The report recommended "a wide range of new activities in Indian education, from increased funds for scholarships to the encouragement of Indian parent participation in the formulation of school programs." This report caused the Bureau of Indian Affairs to shift policy and embark on a program of economic and community development.9 The 1966 Presidential Task Force on Indian Affairs was another attempt to formulate new policy on Indian affairs. The report placed education as the top priority for improving Indian Affairs and strongly endorsed Indian control and the need to have an exemplary school system. 10 A few years later, a special subcommittee on Indian education of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare conducted a major extensive congressional hearing on Indian education. The committee's subsequent Kennedy Report, published in 1969, recommended increased Indian control over education. The report also recommended a National Indian Board of Education and an exemplary federal school system for Indian education.'11 The report further stated that: The coercive assimilation policy has had disastrous effects on the education of Indian children. It has resulted in: 1. The classroom and the school system becoming a sort of battleground in which the Indian child attempts to protect his integrity and identity as an individual by defeating the purposes of the school. 2. Schools that fail to understand or adapt, and-in fact-often denigrate cultural differences. 3. Schools that blame their own failures on Indian students and reinforce their defensiveness. 4. Schools that fail to recognize the importance and validity of the Indian community, causing both the community and its children to retaliate by treating the school as an alien institution. 5. A dismal record of much absenteeism, many dropouts, negative self-image, low achievement, and, ultimately, academic failure for many Indian children. 6. A perpetuation of the cycle of poverty, which undermines the success of all other federal programs. State Governments Even though the federal government-through treaties and laws-is obligated to support American Indian/Alaska Native education, state governments have the responsibility to educate citizens within state boundaries. Many American Indians and Alaska Natives are contributing members of their state economies. Most often, those residing on reservations work in cities and towns and spend their limited incomes in off-reservation businesses. Local school systems depend on property taxes for their existence, and Indian reservation property is exempt from taxation. Yet it is still in the best interest of states to become actively involved with the federal government in financing and ensuring quality education of its American Indian and Alaska Native population. It is the responsibility of all communities to see to it that their most prized resources-children-receive the best education possible. It is in the interest of every state, community, and educational system to ensure that Native people are involved in the education process of children so they, too, can have an opportunity to ensure that their children will have an equal chance to be contributing members of their communities and of society. Footnotes 1. Anderson, T.A. Nations Within A Nation: The American Indian and the Government of the United States. Chappaqua, New York: Union Carbide Corporation, 1976, p. 70. 2. Kickingbird, Kirke, et.al. Indian Treaties Washington, D.C.: Institute for the Development of Indian Law, 1980, p. 20. 3. Anderson, T.A. op. cit., p. 13, 21. 4. Deloria, Vine Jr. A Brief History of the Federal Responsibility for the American Indian Washington, B.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Education, 1979, p. 1. 5. Blue Dog, Kurt A Legal Position Paper on Indian Education Boulder, Colorado: National Advisory Council on Indian Education, 1979, p. 5. 6. Delona, Vine, Jr. op. cit. p 6. 7. Kickingbird, Kirke, et al. op. cit., p. 2. 8. U.S. Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Indian Education-A National Tragedy-A National Challenge. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1969, p. 13. 9. Ibid., p. 15. 10. Ibid., p. 15. 11. Fuchs Estelle and Havighurst Robert. To Live on This Earth: American Indian Education. New York. Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1973, p. 17.