, ' ‘
‘ .u
,. ‘ x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

EXPERIENCES OF AMERICAN INDIAN STUDENTS: THE
IMPACT or THE MICHIGAN INDIAN LEADERSHIP PROGRAM
(MILP)

presented by
JoLee Webb Blackbear

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

Ph.D. degree in Educational Administration

Void;

Majo’r PIQfessor’S Signature
(2,“?th / 7, okOO ’7Z

Date

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

, _._,.4v__. - v

-__-..f -

.'_——-' v

##f v- v

 

 

LIBRARY

Michigan State

University

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

 

MAY 0 “h
‘9‘)2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 c:/ClRC/DateDue.p65-p.15

EXPERIENCES OF AMERICAN INDIAN STUDENTS:
THE IMPACT OF THE MICHIGAN INDIAN
LEADERSHIP PROGRAM (MILP)

By

J oLee Webb Blackbear

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Educational Administration

2004

 

to prep

rarely ;

know;

Mm:fl

 

ABSTRACT

EXPERIENCES OF AMERICAN INDIAN STUDENTS: THE IMPACT OF
THE MICHIGAN INDIAN LEADERSHIP PROGRAM
By

J oLee Webb Blackbear

In the United States, there are thousands of early intervention programs designed
to prepare underrepresented students for college. American Indian students, however,
rarely participate in them. Moreover, documentation on any of these existing programs
regarding their effectiveness is scant (US. Department of Education, 2002). In uncertain
budgetary times, these programs are vulnerable to programmatic cutbacks. Additionally,
there is concern within the overall American Indian community that tribal cultures are
being lost. Seemingly, many Native youth are being lured away from their traditional
tribal ways and are succumbing to gangs, violence, drug and alcohol addiction, suicide,
prison, and other social ills (Bad Wound, 2000). For many Native youth, the concept of
going to college is nearly as unfathomable as completing high school. The national high
school dropout rate for American Indian students is between 30% (Swisher & Hoisch,
1992) to 50% (Chavers, 2000).

There is a demand for highly trained Native leaders in all areas who are
knowledgeable about their culture and secure in their identity; however, not enough
Native leaders meet this criterion to fill the roles (Johnson, et al., 2003; DeGagne’, 2002).

Native people recognize that the education of Indigenous youth is one way to revitalize

Indigo
leaders
Amen-I
Comet

Indian

underst
progtm

l
undersi
Well 3.x
these 6
methoc

iIVCS Q]

and Up

Contrz':

Nude.

 

Indigenous communities. Indigenous communities are seeking ways to develop Native
leaders grounded in their tribal cultures with an ability to lead an increasing diversifying
American Indian community (Johnson, Benham, & VanAlstine, 2003); DeGagné, 2002).
Consequently, they are seeking ways to bridge the learning experiences of living in
Indian and non-Indian worlds.

The study had two primary purposes. The first purpose was to gain an
understanding of an American Indian pre-college, cultural enrichment, summer youth
program. Secondly, the study sought information that would lead to greater
understanding of Native American students’ experiences while in higher education as
well as what contributions pre-college, cultural and academic interventions factor into
these experiences. Using a qualitative research design with various data collection
methods, this study examined a pre-college program to determine its implications in the
lives of Native people that participated in the program in their youth.

This inquiry examined the educational experience of Native American students
and uncovered areas of academic motivation, career and college choice, barriers and
contributors to success, and the navigation between cultural expectations and academic
responsibilities. Until now, the effects of this cultural and academic program had not
been documented; however, qualitative evidence demonstrated this program has
supported and encouraged many Native American students in their pursuit of higher
education. The American Indian Leadership Development Model as implemented by the
program emerged from this study. This research validates the role that pre-college,
cultural and academic enrichment programs can have in the lives of American Indian

students.

Dedicated in Loving Memory of

Grandfather, Archie Kenneth Webb
Auntie, Willow “Woody” Rose

Too Soon
Brother Marcus Williamson

Jay Pewash

And to the future generation
Shianne, Mykala, Josey, Sierra, and Dakota

iv

 

smden'
hopefu

pursue

p11.r Crib.
motiva
Trudy.
provid;
compZ;

Offer I:

Lender
comp;
dhhng
90mph

you SC I

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

With deepest respect, I would like to thank the participants of this study the
students and the youth that allowed me opportunities to share in their storytelling. I am
hopeful that these students’ stories open additional opportunities for all Native students to
pursue their goals whether through education or other choices.

I thank my family for their support and belief that I would finish this project. My
parents for their continuous encouragement and to my sister, Penny, for the late night
motivational phone calls. I would also like to express my gratitude to the Williamsons:
Trudy, Lloyd, Tanya, Victoria and our belated Marcus for being an extended family and
providing me the strength necessary to follow through from undergraduate school to
completing the Ph.D. Words will never be able to convey what you have done for me. I
offer much love and gratitude to Richard Lee who has nurtured the “Dr.” in all of us.

I am eternally grateful to Eva Menefee for founding the Michigan Indian
Leadership Program. While many have assisted along the way, it was your vision, love,
compassion, insight, knowledge of traditional ways of being and willingness to persevere
during the hardest of times that has contributed to numerous American Indian students
completing high school, college, graduate school and now the first MILP Ph.D. Thank
you so much Eva, your love will never be forgotten.

I express gratitude to my dissertation committee Marylee Davis, John Dirkx,
Steve Weiland and Susan Applegate Krouse. My Chair and Advisor, Marylee Davis has
pulled me through some challenging times and kept me on target. Thank you for

believing in me even when I was ready to give up. I want to thank John and Steve for

 

Introd;
COUISC‘
tohIIJ
paste
foryo;
Clean?

apprec

studer.
unlit
a Wow

you $61

 

[he ml
mend

Willie:

 

introducing me to some very exciting elements of qualitative research. Without your
coursework, these stories would never have been collected or told. Susan, I am so lucky
to have an American Indian faculty member on my committee. Your insight,
perspectives and spirit guided both the study and me in positive directions. Thank you
for your support -- you exemplify the type of Native leadership this study is about. Mary
Clearingsky, you have served as a wonderful role-model and mentor to me and you are
appreciated.

This study was accomplished with the love and support of a cohort of friends and
students, Anne Hornak, Sonia Garcia, Katherine Flaga, Evan Vanderpool, Allyn Shaw
and Michael DeGagné. Sonia, we have been a team since our Masters program — you are
a wonderful friend. Michael, as a recent graduate, emerging scholar and Native person
you served as a superb role-model and offering the kindness and support when I needed it
the most. I also extend appreciation for the wonderful support and coaching from my
friend Dr. Nabil El—Ghourgy and the emotional support of my best-friend Dr. Tanya
Williamson. Thank you, Tim Gunn, for years of struggling through the writing process
with me and making me a better, more thoughtful writer. Thank you Allyn for the
assistance during those crisis moments and for getting me through when the end was not
in sight. Thank you, Jonathan Elendu, for your love, support and patience during this
process and for sharing in the happy moments.

Several offices and services at Michigan State University have contributed to my
ability to complete a Ph.D. The College Achievement Admissions Program (CAAP)
served as a catalyst and support system for completing an undergraduate degree as well

as the McNair Summer Research Opportunity Program in motivating me toward graduate

vi

 

educat

l)r LC.

SUV? c

ndcn

progr.

 

 

education. It was through the leadership and foresight of the Provost, Lou Anna Simon,
Dr. Lee June and the KCP director, Dr. Pamela Bellamy, that this program continues to

serve and encourage Native students. Thank you for your willingness to institutionalize
and embrace the MILP program.

I would like to thank Michaelina Magnuson for having the vision to keep this
program going and for being my friend.

Finally, I would like to express my deepest appreciation to the department and
college in which I work. The Eli Broad College of Business has provided ample support
and consideration while I have been pursing this degree program. Specifically, Dr.
Allison Barber, Dr. Mike Mazzeo, Dr. Eileen Wilson and Peggy Lux have encouraged
and been committed to my completing this degree program. Additionally, several
coworkers have provided much needed morale boosting thanks to Sherry, Chris, Lonnie,

Nancy, Jane, Jeff, Dwight, Jim R. Jim M. and Erika.

vii

~"i'w'dh-l l— n I‘" ' r}

 

 

LIST (

CRAP

CHAF

CHAT

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................... xii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ......................................................... 1
Statement of the Problem ................................................................... 1
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions .......................................... 2
Significance of the Study .................................................................. 5
Definitions ................................................................................... 7
Summary ................................................................................... 10
CHAPTER TWO: A REVIEW OF INDIAN EDUCATION
HISTORY AND POLICY ........................................... 12
Introduction ................................................................................ 12
The Legacy of Colonialism/Eurocentrism .............................................. 14
Federal Indian Policy ...................................................................... 17
Federal Policy and Indigenous Education ............................................... l8
Urbanization ................................................................................ 22
Cultural Revitalization and Self-Determination ....................................... 23
Tribal Legal Definitions ................................................................... 23
Federal Legal Definitions ................................................................ 26

CHAPTER THREE: CRITICAL REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE. . . . . . . 28
Introduction ................................................................................ 28

US. Demographic Changes, Federal Pre-college and College Initiatives ........ 28

viii

Campus Climate and Resilience ......................................................... 30

Conventional Ethnic Identity Paradigms ............................................... 32
Native Identity from an Indigenous Paradigm ......................................... 34
Research on Native Identity ............................................................. 35
Current Models of Teaching and Learning ............................................. 38
Indigenous Models of Teaching and Learning ........................................ 40
The Michigan Indian Leadership Program ............................................ 41
MILP Concept, Design and Background ............................................... 42
The Role of Researcher .................................................................. 46
Summary ................................................................................... 47
CHAPTER FOUR: METHODOLOGY ..................................................... 48
Introduction ................................................................................. 48
Research Questions ....................................................................... 50
Research Design, Procedures and Context ........................................... 50
Archival Materials and Notes ........................................................... 51
Non-structured, Non-recorded Interviews ............................................. 51
Confidentiality ............................................................................ 52
Consideration of Human Subjects ...................................................... 52
Observations -- Setting and Context .................................................... 53
Journal Writings ........................................................................... 54
Photographs ................................................................................ 55
Selection of the Student Interview Participants ....................................... 55
One-on-One Personal Interviews ....................................................... 56

C HA]

 

'I. 1‘

. . 'illliowvnfalnsh I} “J (.i‘l.IL-.\.4.H.s
. _
. a <.‘
. v;

 

 

Native Setting .............................................................................. 57

Consideration of Qualitative Findings ................................................. 58
Data Analysis .............................................................................. 58
Role as the Researcher ................................................................... 59
Summary ................................................................................... 63
CHAPTER FIVE: FINDINGS OF THE STUDY ......................................... 64
Introduction ................................................................................ 64
Researcher’s Daily Observations ....................................................... 67
Researcher’s Reflections ................................................................. 67
Findings and Themes ..................................................................... 75
Native Leadership: A Measure of Balance and Empowerment ........... 75
Community Building ..................................................................... 79
Perceptions of Identity ................................................................... 8]
Importance of Culture at MILP ......................................................... 84
Mentoring .................................................................................. 85
Career Choice and Motivation .......................................................... 88
Navigating Culture and Higher Education ............................................. 89
Academics ........................................................................ 95
Multiple Academic Support Services ......................................... 95
Financial Support ................................................................ 96

The Role of Native Faculty/Staff Support and
Others as Mentors ................................................................ 97
Social Support .................................................................... 99

 

 

(TIA

APPE

 

BIBLI

 

Organizations ................................................................... 100

Role of Family in Areas of Support and Barriers .......................... 101

Resiliency to Drugs and Alcohol ............................................. 104

Summary ................................................................................. 106
CHAPTER SIX: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS

AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................... 108

Introduction .............................................................................. 108

Implications .............................................................................. 1 15

Limitations of the Study ................................................................ 121

Recommendations for Future Research .............................................. 122

Conclusions .............................................................................. 123

APPENDICES ................................................................................... 125
APPENDIX A: CHRONOLOGY OF IMPORTANT DATES

IN INDIAN EDUCATION (Juneau, 2001) ............... 126

APPENDIX B: INFORMED CONSENT .................................... 132

APPENDD( C: DATA COLLECTION FORM ............................. 135

APPENDIX D: MILP SUMMER STAFF

TRAINING SCHEDULE ................................... 137

APPENDD( E: INTERVIEW PROTOCOLS ............................... 140

APPENDIX F: PROFILES OF ONE-ON-ONE INTERVIEWEES. 146

APPENDIX G: MILP 2003 SUMMER SCHEDULE ...................... 153

APPENDIX H: UCRII-IS APPROVAL ....................................... 156

BIBLIOGRAPHY............................. ................................................... 158

xi

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1: MILP American Indian Leadership Development Model ................ 120

xii

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problem

In the United States, thousands of early intervention programs are designed to
prepare underrepresented students for college. American Indian students, however,
rarely participate in them. Moreover, documentation on any of these existing programs
regarding their effectiveness is scant (US. Department of Education, 2002). In uncertain
budgetary times, these programs are vulnerable to programmatic cutbacks. Additionally,
there is concern within the overall American Indian community that tribal cultures are
being lost. Languages are disappearing, and traditions and ceremonies are lessening.
Seemingly, many Native youth are being lured away from their traditional tribal ways
and are succumbing to gangs, violence, drug and alcohol addiction, suicide, prison, and
other social ills (Bad Wound, 2000). For many Native youth, the concept of going to
college is nearly as unfathomable as completing high school. The national high school
dropout rate for American Indian students is between 30% (Swisher & Hoisch, 1992) to
50% (Chavers, 2000).

American Indian communities recognize that the historic and continuous process
of colonial domination has weakened modern Native socio-cultural and economic
systems (Hassin & Young, 1999). Fanon (1968) identifies that those living within the
context of cultural domination experience pervading questions of self-identity, values,
and traditions. The sense of identity loss is profound and is exacerbated by the complex
classifications of how Native people are defined. Native communities are responding

today to various social problems by seeking Native leaders who can guide Indigenous

 

;l¢
.5
I
E
. g

COIIIIT

Berth.

EICJS

Uohr

efion-

cultu: .

COIIIIT

devel

unive:

 

colic;
recog-

cul

tur

PFOm.
the M
'MSL'
Panic;
of 19:5,

expert;

 

communities into an era of cultural revitalization and community healing (Johnson,
Benham, & VanAlstine, 2003).

The supply of qualified leaders grounded in their cultures and skilled in other
areas cannot yet meet the demand for the expertise and leadership tribal people seek
(Johnson, et al., 2003; DeGagné, 2002). Current Indigenous leaders are trailblazing
efforts in an attempt to reposition Native nations into more stabilized economic and
cultural conditions. Native communities recognize that one approach to rebuilding
communities is through the education and leadership development of their youth. The
development of pre-college, cultural enrichment programs is one way in which tribes and
universities are responding to the education and development of Indigenous youth. Pre-
college, cultural enrichment programs designed by Native people for Indigenous youth
recognize that American Indian communities need Native leaders grounded in their tribal

cultures with an ability to lead an increasingly diverse American Indian community.

Purpose of the Study and Research Questions

The purpose of this study was to examine a one-week, summer, pre-college,
cultural enrichment camp in order to discover the role that pre-college programs have in
promoting and supporting the education of American Indian youth. This study examined
the Michigan Indian Leadership Program (MILP) held at Michigan State University
(MSU). Additionally, this study examined the experiences of higher education
participants or graduates who participated in their youth in the MILP between the years
of 1988-2002. Therefore, the student participants in this study had, in common, the

experience of attending the same pre-college, cultural enrichment camp in their youth,

 

ElIICI

year

under

in forr

EXper,

progr-

 

there;
fittiOrv

BURL.

StUder

 

 

 

ali‘ecl:

{lime

 

attending post-secondary education and serving as Peer-Mentors during their college
years. The MILP recruited mostly underrepresented American Indian youth whose
opportunities and experiences with higher education were very limited. Therefore, this
study operates from an underlying assumption that most of the participants in the MILP
program would not have had the exposure or skills necessary to obtain higher education
without their involvement in the program. Anecdotal observations from three MILP
program coordinators, including the researcher, indicated that many participants of the
MILP might not have graduated high school without participation in the program.

The study had two primary purposes. The first purpose was to gain an
understanding of the MH.P’S history, mission, and evolution. Second, the study sought
information that would lead to a greater understanding of Native American students’
experiences and the contribution of pre-college, cultural and academic intervention
programs. The study sought to answer the following questions:

What were the outcomes and experiences of youth that participated in the
Michigan Indian Leadership Program?

How do American Indian college students who participated in MILP navigate
cultural and academic expectations?

Native Nations are utilizing education as a tool for cultural revitalization;
therefore, it is important for Native people to succeed in higher education. Several
factors negatively influence American Indian students’ success in the area of education.
Bowker (1993) identifies that teachers with low academic expectations who counsel their
students into vocationally oriented curriculum contribute to high attrition. Other factors
affecting retention at the college level include parental and community involvement,

financial support, high school preparation, campus support programs, and value conflicts

 

(Fall:

thetr

 

 

 

(Falk & Aitken, 1984). Pavel (1999) indicates additional factors negatively influencing
the transition from high school to college for Native students are college admission test
scores, core curriculum, course completion, and other college admission criteria.
Significant literature exists that explains the failures of Native students in the higher
educational system, but studies on Indigenous student experiences are lacking.

To meet the demands of mainstream education, American Indian students often
feel compelled to choose between their tribal cultures and mainstream American culture
(Whirlwind Soldier, 1997). Balancing the responsibility of class attendance, the
maintenance of grades, and the demands of studying often collide with the expectations
of tribal, clan, family, ceremonial and pow wow responsibilities. In an attempt to meet
the demands of higher education, many Native students experience a conflict within the
two cultures they are trying to navigate. Succeeding in higher education may contribute
to students’ sense of identity loss if they participate less in their Native culture in order to
succeed in higher education.

Several studies indicate that grounding the educational experience in the context
of one’s language and culture correlates with healthy identity formation and academic
success (Bamhardt, 1999; Cleary & Peacock, 1998). Research indicates that Indian
students experience high drop out rates in college, ranging from 75 to 93% (Falk &
Aitken, 1984). Getting American Indians into college is an even more challenging task.
The majority of American Indian students living on reservations experience inferior
elementary and secondary education due to limited resources and are less likely to be
college bound than other populations (Gilbert, 2000). Urban Indians suffer as well, living

and attending schools in the more economically depressed areas of cities.

 

must
Rude

thE

umrn
purp.
acad;
rages;
com;

Cdu; .

 

It is the assertion of this study that mainstream institutions of higher education
must first recognize the level of cultural conflict that is still present for many Native
students and then develop and support programs that assist Native people in participating
in higher education. Since most Native American students participate in mainstream
institutions of higher education, it is imperative that programs and support systems be
implemented that work within the confines of the United States educational system.
These programs need to bridge the gap for Native students who are attempting to

navigate both the Indian and non-Indian worlds.

Significance of the Study

An examination of Native students’ personal insights into academia will add to
the paucity of literature on American Indians in higher education (Huffman, 2001). The
purpose of this study is to understand how Native students navigate cultural and
academic expectations and if programs such as MILP assist in that process. Native
researchers’ perspectives of American Indian identity will further illuminate the
complexities of identity issues and give rise to the voice of Indigenous students in higher
education from an Indigenous paradigm.

American Indian organizations throughout the country organized and developed
the National Research Agenda for American Indian Education (Chavers, 2000). This
Agenda outlines several areas crucial to future research in the area of Native education,
including understanding successful Native students and how they persist and become
successful; the effects of pre-college programs on student success; and the need to study

the experiences of the successful Native students to determine influences of educational

 

[\C
P8

I‘CSCLI

anle

Nam

prm 1

 

 

CHIN}

 

success. The National Agenda advocates the development of studies utilizing qualitative
methodological approaches to assess the student experience from the perspective of
personal and cultural expectations. The National Agenda recognizes that previous
research involving Native students has typically been directed by outsiders (non-Natives)
and has focused on deficits, problems, and social barriers.

Deloria ( 1993) asserts that for over a century non-Indian scholars have come to
Native communities, talked with elders, and then published the results, achieving fame
and fortune while the elders remain in poverty. Tribal people must find institutional
protection from the "culture vultures" who misuse their knowledge. Therefore, it is
recommended that future research include Native scholars and focus on successes and
best practices in order to identify appropriate school reform and improvement efforts
(Mihesuah, 1998; Strang, von Glatz, & Cahape Hammer, 2002). This study will look at
what is working with the MILP program and use this information to make suggestions to
further improve the area of Indian education.

Michigan State University has maintained a long-standing effort to recruit and
provide support for its American Indian students. Eva Menefee, a former MSU Native
American staff member, founded the Michigan Indian Youth Retreat (MIYR) in 1988.
She recognized the need to assist and support Michigan Native youth in their
participation in the educational system and to encourage them on to higher education.
She developed MIYR into a program that provided Michigan Native American youth the
opportunity to live on MSU’s campus during a week in the summer. The goal of this
program was to construct an environment that provided pre-college services and cultural

enrichment to Michigan Native American youth (Program Report, 1996). Additionally,

1, .-'»"L 3' -" . -

 

achi
deve
PICS
intro
0-11 Ll:
exp;
Ping:
)‘Cl If.
in his
SiUd-c‘

dni;

 

1nd:

 

 

 

the program utilized American Indian college students as Peer Mentors to the youth. The
activities and the program design were developed to serve as a skill building and
retention program to benefit the college student Peer Mentors in their higher education
experiences.

The MIYR program provided a comprehensive approach to improve academic
achievement and enhance the social, cultural, spiritual, leadership and life skills
development of Native youth in grades 6 to 12 as well as college-age Peer Mentors. The
program’s focus fostered student success at the lower grades and high school, while
introducing them to the demands of college or university life. The program also focused
on developing Native leadership skills among the Peer Mentors. The program has since
expanded and evolved into what is now known as the Michigan Indian Leadership
Program (MILP). This program has existed for sixteen years and empirical results have
yet to be determined. While a few studies have examined the success of Native students
in higher education (DeGagné, 2002; Brayboy, 1999), none have explored Native
students’ participation in pre-college programs designed to bridge cultural and academic

divides, such as the MILP.

Definitions
Most of the following are terms that are commonly used within the American

Indian community, and will be used in this study.

American Indian: There is general agreement that there is no single definition or

criterion for declaring someone to be an American Indian. Individual tribes, the Bureau

 

of I

def:

me I

hav

desr

IOOIE

 

 

ALT":

Unix;

 

NOD}

 

of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Census Bureau all have varying criteria. These
definitions range from people who identify themselves as American Indians, to tribal
members, to those having one—fourth or more American Indian ancestry. Tribes generally
have the power to determine tribal membership. This study refers to persons or
descendents of the Indigenous population of the Americas. In this dissertation, American

Indian, Native American, Indigenous, Indian and Native were used interchangeably.

Band: An organized Indian community.

Full-blood: Refers to people whose biological and cultural heritage is strongly

rooted in American Indian communities (Krouse, 1999).

Indian Country: An area where the tribe has the power of self-govemment. As
defined by federal law, it consists of reservations, dependent American Indian
communities, and American Indian allotments. The definition of "Indian Country"
includes non-Indian owned lands within the boundaries of reservations. This definition is

Q

also commonly used to refer to the Pan American Indian community, including urban

areas associated with the community, such as cultural centers for schools.

Michigan Indian Tuition Waiver: An Act to provide free tuition for North
American Indians in public, state, community or junior colleges, public colleges, or
universities, or federal tribally controlled community colleges. The program is for all

North American Indians who are Michigan residents for 12 consecutive months, are not

less

\‘CII:

youu

 

«HIR’MSZ'» '4 "‘

arse

ofne

 

P60?
Hadx
Cuhu
loge:
00 S

hl\[(f

L:-

 

 

4k

 

less than 1/4 blood quantum as certified by the person’s tribal association, and are

verified by the Inter-Tribal Council of Michigan, Inc.

MIL_P Youth Participant: In this study MILP youth participant refers to those

youth who participated in the 2003 summer program.

Mixed-blood: used by Indians and non-Indians to refer to people whose physical
appearance and cultural traditions place them between the two societies, part of each and

of neither (Mihesuah, 1998; Krouse, 1999).

Pan-Indian: used to refer to the shared attributes and experiences of Indigenous
people. The term Pan-Indian has been applied to the process of blending and spreading
traditional culture. Due to the number of different groups and the diversity of their
cultural practices, some groups lost many of their traditional customs. Others joined
together on reservations or by virtue of modern communications and transportation, took
on some of the practices of other Aboriginal groups. Some universal practices have a

history in some groups but not in others.

People of the Three Fires: Refers to the people of the three tribes Potawotomie,

Odawa and Ojibwe.

Reservation: An area of land reserved for the use of American Indians. The
reservation can be created through treaty, congressional legislation or executive order.

(American Indian Communities in Minnesota, retrieved April 15, 2004)

Talking Circle: In many indigenous traditions there is a process of coming to a
group decision or understanding in what is known as a talking circle. Each person is
welcomed to speak freely without interruption. Each participant is expected to treat all
other speakers with respect even when he or she disagrees with them, as well as to
acknowledge and build on previous speakers' ideas, so that there is an increasingly rich

accumulation of thought and a building of consensus.

Tribal Member: An individual formally recognized by a tribe as a member. The

requirements for recognition vary and are set by each tribe.

mpg: There are both federally recognized and ethnological tribes. A federally
recognized tribe has a special legal relationship with the US. government. This is often
based on ethnological tribes, which are groups of "people bound together by blood ties
who were socially, politically, and religiously organized, who lived together in a defined
territory and who spoke a common language or dialect.” (American Indian Communities

in Minnesota, retrieved April 15, 2004)

Summary
The next five chapters in this study review the relevant literature, the history and
policies of Indian Education, research methodology employed, findings from the study,
and major interpretations and implications of the data. Chapter Two provides the context
and background for this study. Two reviews the history of Indian Education and policies

as well as presents an historical overview of the impact of colonialism and its effects on

10

ITIO

U

 

edu

SIUC

fror

from

 

 

 

modern Indian country. Chapter Three, the literature review provides the history of
education for Indigenous people in the United States and sets the context for Indian
education today. Chapter Four the methodology, identifies the methods employed in this
study and the justification for using the research design. Chapter Five presents findings
from the observations of participating in the MILP program, as well as interpretations
from participants’ written contributions, one-on-one interviews and other data collected.
The final chapter discusses the major implications, interpretations and limitations of the

study.

11

 

 

 

peo
intr
phil
Sine
crea-
C311
5m
is a I

lden

 

 

CHAPTER TWO

A REVIEW OF INDIAN EDUCATION HISTORY AND POLICY

Introduction

Globally, colonized Indigenous peoples have been left with a devastating
aftermath of social and economic ills. The colonization efforts in North America not
only disturbed the spiritual balance that was present within its Indigenous cultures, but
also genocide, cultural dislocation and other assimilationist practices pushed Indigenous
people away from their ability to carry out traditions. This disturbed balance in the
intricate social, cultural and environmental systems of the Indigenous people. Native
philosophy indicates that when one area is out of balance, all areas become impacted.
Since the characteristics of Native spirituality include inner balance of self, harmony with
creation, awareness and understanding of the environment and social responsibility; one
can identify that the consequences of colonialism are not the “problems” but rather
symptoms of a wider condition. The condition of modern American Indian communities
is a manifestation of a loss of balance, lack of spiritual centeredness, confusion in
identity, and conflict within the dominant culture (Cajete, 2000).

The history of American Indian education is embedded in the context of colonial
impact and domination. While every Indigenous nation has its own life-ways, traditions
and spirituality, foundationally the experience and impact of colonialism created
commonalities still shared by present day tribes and individuals. Post-colonial impact
includes the usurpation of traditional roles, the imposition of a foreign government

system, and the removal of children from homes for purposes of education and de-

12

 

 

 

era:
Ind:

lowl

Whi
phi]
Amt
all u

thy

 

culturalization (Hassin & Young, 1999). Additionally, the aftermath of colonial
education includes the loss of culture, language and Native identity that resulted from
cultural dislocation. Colonization methods of teaching and learning encouraged the
eradication of tribal culture and promoted the agenda of assimilation and acculturation for
Indigenous people. This level of cultural conflict continues as a contributing factor in
low academic achievement amongst American Indian students (Carrol, 1978; Homett,
1989; Huffman, 1995; Lin, LaCounte & Eder, 1988; Scott, 1986; Swisher & Deyhle,
1989).

Another guiding framework for this study is that of Native science or philosophy.
While Native tribes and nations are intrinsically different, there are certain guiding
philosophies or aspects of spirit that are similar across groups. In most traditional Native
American cultures, the worldview is perceived in relationship to the natural world with
all things earth, water, animals, plants, and people-being interconnected. In following the
rhythm of the natural world, balance is harmoniously achieved. Spirituality, education,
identity, leadership and culture are aspects that cannot be separated within the context of
Indigenous ways of being (Cajete, 2000).

This review will provide an overview and background for this study. It will give
an historical overview of the impact of colonialism and Federal Indian education policies
and its present day effects on Native American people. These effects include

urbanization, cultural revitalization and self-determination for American Indian people.

13

 

 

 

All}:

eigh

RE
(i’)

IEmI

011b,

 

led I

the :

 

The Legacy of Colonialism/Eurocentrism

According to Mills (1997) we live in a world that has been shaped over the past
500 years by the realities of European domination and the gradual consolidation of global
white supremacy. Colonialism is the beginning of a movement to feudalize political
systems around the globe so as to stabilize the economic conditions of the more affluent
nations (Deloria, 1994). This section will focus on the colonial relationship of the United
States with its Indigenous population.

There were several levels of colonial contact with people Indigenous to North
America. The first level of contact began prior to the Revolutionary War in the late
eighteenth century. The second included the Europeans’ westward movement, which
began to destroy Native people’s ways of life. This included Native land settlement and
removal, the slaughter of buffalo, reservation and treaty development, and eradication of
tribal cultural traditions. The practice of Native American traditions was made illegal
and this ensured further confrontation between Natives and the dominant Euro-American
culture. In addition, struggles continue to play out in the present day over political,
economic, religious and educational sovereignty. Federal Indian policies contributed to
the creation of an urban, intermarried, bi-cultural American Indian population that lives
outside traditional American Indian geographic and cultural regions (Nagel, 1995).
Colonialism fostered the inability of Native people to control their own lives. This has
led to social disorganization, poverty, deteriorated living standards, loss of spirituality,
and migration to urban areas.

Native nations in North America experienced the effects of being brought under

the rule of European powers’ (later the United States) creating a white polity in

14

- A
“ IF'~‘.\'¢' .\ 'V ' fl

 

SUD

will

lead-

D€Ct

AIE
con:

belt

lCer

foil

l

 

 

COR:

 

opposition to their Indigenous subjects (Mills, 1997). Modern day implications of
colonial impact include health concerns like high rates of suicide, family violence and
alcoholism, and social concerns like poverty, poor living conditions and low academic
success rates within the general Native population. As Native cultures continue to
struggle with the loss of culture, language, spirituality and balance they also are burdened
with meeting the expectations of the larger society.

Current statistics provide convincing evidence of the demand for Native
leadership rooted within Native culture and community combined with the skills
necessary to face the current and future challenges. The following statistics illuminate in
greater depth the consequences of cultural dislocation within Native communities and
resonate the need for the emergence and development of Native leaders. According to
1990 census data and other sources, the following statistics prevail: 17% American
Indian high school graduates attend college compared with 62% national average (AIEF,
retrieved March 17, 2003); 50% of American Indian people do not complete high school
and in some parts of country, this is as high as 90% (Indian Country Today as cited in
AIEF, retrieved March 17, 2003); 8.8% American Indian people are college graduates
compared with 20.3% a national average (Census); 31.6% American Indian people are
below poverty level as compared to 13.1% of the national average; $19,897 is the
American Indian median income compared with the national average of $30,056
(Census).

Further chronicling the colonial aftermath are health data for Native people. The
following statistics are from the National Center for Health Statistics, Center for Disease

Control and Indian Health Services data. The leading causes of death for American

15

c ‘2' '7‘ V "A C ‘. "YF ]

 

 

Int
fer
Ar

Illil

et a
)‘OU
Inh-

Il\';j

 

60-1;
fed;

COT:-

 

 

Indian males are heart disease, accidents, liver disease, and suicide. For American Indian
females the leading causes of death are heart disease, accidents and diabetes. 30% of
American Indian deaths are people under the age of 45 compared with 10% of the
national average dying before that age. The alcoholism death rate for American Indian
people has increased 57% since 1987. The alcohol related death rate for American Indian
people between 1994 and 1996 was 48.7 deaths per 100,000 and is over seven times the
US. national average of 6.7 per 100,000 for 1995.

The aforementioned situations are some of the most devastating effects of living
within a post-colonialist environment and are far reaching. The consequences of trauma
exacerbate problems within the wider Native population, and tribes are calling for Native
leadership to assist with healing their communities. There is a demand for highly trained
Native leaders in all areas who are knowledgeable about their culture and secure in their
identity; however, not enough Native leaders meet this criterion to fill the roles (Johnson,
et al., 2003; DeGagné, 2002). Native people recognize that education of Indigenous
youth is one way to revitalize society and bring forth leaders to heal Native Nations and
tribal peoples; consequently, they are seeking ways to bridge the learning experiences of

living in Indian and non-Indian worlds.

Federal Indian Education Policy
Federal Indian education policy had a profound impact on American Indian
education. The federal policy had four areas of control: tribal control, the assumption of
federal control, the transfer to state control and the return toward tribal control. Prior to

contact, the tribes controlled the education of their members, generally through family,

16

 

 

the
sys
me:

30;.

Intlg

 

 

clan, and community systems. In 1794, the federal government agreed to provide
education services to tribes as part of payment for land taken by treaties. This agreement
largely established boarding and day schools and vocational training. In the early 19005,
the transfer of Native education was ceded to state control. The federal Indian school
system was widely criticized and the Merriam Report (1926) which called for changes in
methods of educating Natives was established (Native American Rights Fund [NARF],
2004).

Conditions in boarding schools were physically, emotionally and spiritually
damaging to Indian students. During the 19603, Indian students faced high drop out rates
and their needs were not being served by the boarding schools or public school systems.
Again, criticisms were placed on the federal Indian policy that did not allow Indian
control of or participation in education. Since the 19703 and the Indian self-
determination act, tribes began to operate schools and education systems formerly run by
the federal government. Regardless of these efforts, in 1991, the US. Department of
Education considered American Indian tribes “nations at risk.” (NARF, 2004).

In the early nineteenth century, federal Indian policy forced Native people to
acquire the English language by removing children from their homes and placing them
into Anglo-centric education in Indian boarding and day schools (Nagel, 1995). The
results of these federal polices contributed to the urbanization of Natives. Many Native
people left their reservations during World War II as they volunteered for or were drafted
into the military or took industrial jobs in urban areas. In addition, post war job training
and urban relocation programs were created to move Native people off reservations and

into urban areas (N agel, 1995). The events of World War II and the American civil rights

17

 

 

mm
whi

imp

COIT

mix

P61": '
of b

“It:

6dr.
Th .

The .

 

movement set the stage for Native people to begin questioning the federal authority,
which had controlled their lives (Stein, 1990). Appendix A has a detailed chronology of

important dates in Indian education.

Federal Policy and Indigenous Education

In 1869, US President Ulysses S. Grant created the “peace policy” which
established missions and schools on Indian reservations. Off reservation boarding
schools were also established to remove children from the cultural influences of
community and family (Kidwell, 1985; Persson, 1986; Mallea, 1989). By 1884,
missionary schools had been established in 73 different Indian tribes and had provided
education for 239,000 Indian students (Noel, 2002). Indian children were immersed into
the US. mainstream culture and educated in both its language and values. During the
period of 1819-1873 missionary schools were created for the Christianizing of Native
people. The missionary presence drastically altered Native communities and their ways
of being. A civilization fund was established to finance Christian missionary schools
within Indian territories to “promote civilization among the savages” (Noel, 2002).

For the government, civilizing Native people was as important an agenda as
educating them. Between 1870-1901 off-reservation boarding schools were established.
The goals of these schools were to indoctrinate children into the Christian way of life.
The Carlisle school in Pennsylvania, one of the best-known Indian boarding schools,
implemented the following policies: students had to wear standard uniforms; boys had
their long hair cut short; students Indigenous named were changed to English names;

traditional foods were abandoned; and students were not allowed to speak their Native

18

_ f

".1.

.' "h'h- -.

 

 

CUT?

Ind.

that

 

C01:
De.

FTC:

 

 

languages (AIEF, 2003). These policies had incredible consequences in de-Indianizing
the Children who attended these boarding schools.

As more parents and family members attempted to see their children, a practice
known as “walling in the children” was formed to counteract the perceived regressive
family influence. At Colorado River Agency, agents enclosed the school’s building by
constructing an eight-foot adobe wall to “separate the children from all outside influence
and contact with the tribe which was necessary in order to teach them morality” (Noel,
2002). Parents and family members would camp outside the wall in an effort to be close
to the children. From 1901—1910, on-reservation education began to take place with the
curricular focus being on industrial education. The colonialist system of educating
Indigenous people has left a legacy of psychological, emotional and often physical scars
that permeate the culture today.

The Merriam Report of 1926 called for changes in methods of educating Natives
and included reforms such as providing parents and youth with tools to assist them in
living in both Indian and non-Indian worlds. The report also indicated that older children
should attend non-reservation boarding schools and younger children should attend
community schools near the home. The 19308 brought about Collier’s “Indian New
Deal” which stressed educating Native people while valuing Native culture. Several
programs were initiated in this endeavor, including and providing teachers who were
sensitive to Native culture, the elimination of the military routine of the boarding schools,
vocational programs that taught skills beneficial to reservation life, job training that

focused on rural life rather than urban life, Indian history, art and language was

19

introduced in the Indian schools; and elimination of interference with Indian religious life
or ceremonial expression (AHZF, 2003).

The 19403 saw a return to the assimilationist movement and away from cross-
cultural training. During World War II funding for reservations was cut, causing schools
to deteriorate and close; the policy of “de-Indianizing the Indian” was back (AIEF, 2003).
Native people organized against the assimilationist efforts. Between the end of the
Roosevelt era and the beginning of the Kennedy administration, Native Americans,
congressional leaders, and government administrators developed a policy that they hoped
would integrate the Indian population with mainstream America. These efforts enacted
laws to terminate the government's trusteeship of Indian lands and relocate Indians to the
nation's cities. In the mid 19603 the National Advisory Council on Indian Education
(NACIE) was formed to advise the Secretary of Education and the Congress on funding
and administration of programs that impacted Indian children or adult participants of
education.

In 1969, the Kennedy Report indicated that “the dominant policy of the federal
government toward the American Indian has been one of coercive assimilation” and the
policy “has had disastrous effects on the education of Indian children,” (as cited in AIEF
2003). Friere (1970) asserts that the current education system has been used as an
instrument of the economic, social, political, and paternalistic domination to create a
"culture of silence" in which the dispossessed have been submerged into a situation that
encourages ignorance and lethargy over a critical awareness of one's world. The
traditional Western educational system has failed educate Native American people

(Pavel, 1995). Their native counterparts often see those that do receive a mainstream

20

education as having become “white.” The teacher-centered educational system and the
nature of the educational system in the United States has failed to “educate,” but rather
fostered the assimilation and acculturation of Indigenous people.

The Indian Education Act of 1972 was a unique piece of legislation that provided
direct financial support for the education of all American Indian and Native Alaskan
students in public, tribal, as well as Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) schools. Changes
included the development of educational structures that were responsive to the needs of
Indian people. The 19803 and 19903 included more organizational efforts by tribal
leaders and pan-Indian organization leaders. Under the leadership of President Clinton,
goals were established to build economic self-determination in Indian communities.
AIEF (2003) quotes Karen Swisher (Standing Rock Sioux), a respected Indian educator
and President of Haskell Indian Nations University:

In exchange for nearly one billion acres of land certain services, protection

against invasion, and self-govemment were to be provided in perpetuity . . . More

than 400 treaties solemnized the transactions - land in exchange for promises —
between sovereigns . . . thus creating a special relationship between Indian people

and the federal government (p. 2).

The educational history of Indigenous people is disheartening. It is challenging to
distinguish whether large numbers of Native people today are not successful in achieving
degrees in higher education because of cultural conflict or distrust of the educational
system. Mainstream education forces a compromise between choosing higher education
and the possibility of identity confusion. Understanding the role that identity plays for

Indigenous people will assist educators in developing programs that may assist students

in bridging their worlds.

21

Urbanization

Urban relocation efforts were a direct result of an era of “termination”
implemented by the federal government in the early 19503 and many Native Americans
live in urban areas today as a result of moving to urban locations in search of jobs or
education (Snipp, 1992). Urbanization has resulted in higher rates of inter-marriage with
non-Indians increasing the numbers of mixed-bloods living in urban areas than on
reservations (Krouse, 1999). While many Native people do maintain connections to their
tribes, often mixed-bloods and urban Indians struggle to maintain connections to their
tribal communities continuing to cultivate the disconnect that years of colonialism
fostered. Urbanization has many implications regarding the loss of culture. The
percentage of Native people living in urban areas has increased from 27.9% in 1960 to
56.2% in 1990 (Nagel, 1995). Natives living in urban areas have higher intermarriage
rates compared to other racial and ethnic groups. Urban mix-blood parents married to
non-Indians often assign their children the race of the non-Indian parent (Nagel, 1995).
Urbanization has also supported the loss and use of Indigenous languages. In 1990, 77%
of American Indians spoke only English in their homes (US. Bureau of the Census
1992:66).

Cultural Revitalization and Self-Determination

Both the Civil Rights movement of the 19603 and President Lyndon B. Johnson’s
War on Poverty ended the assimilationist momentum of US. Federal Indian policy.
During the 19703, Native people established an intertribal (pan-Indian) collective identity
and began a series of protests, balking against years of broken treaties and ecological

abuses on tribal lands. Native people wanted to go back to their old ways (traditions) and

22

be able to return to the ceremonial uses of their lands (Deloria, 1994). As people fed into
the inner cities, urban Indian life burgeoned through the development of Indian centers
and organizations, intertribal clubs, bars, powwows, and dance groups in addition to
Indian newspapers, newsletters, social service agencies, and political organizations

(W eibel-Orlando, 1991). As urban Indian people evolved bureaucratic awareness, they
lobbied successfully to send War on Poverty resources into impoverished urban and
reservation communities (Nagel, 1995). Nagel (1995) found that the political activism

and resurgence of Native identity fostered a movement toward reclaiming Native identity.

Tribal Legal Definitions

How do we define the term American Indian? One of the first ways to look at the
definition of American Indian identity is to look at US. laws under which tribes
determine their own tribal membership. Each tribe has within its own realm of authority
the ability to determine its citizenry. The US. government does not have the authority to
determine tribal membership. Each tribe has the sovereignty to determine its
membership based upon the standards and criteria they set for themselves. One of the
most common aspects of determining tribal membership is through “blood quantum,” or
degree of Indian ancestry. Nearly two-thirds of all federally recognized tribes within the
United States require a minimum blood-quantum (usually one-quarter) in order for a
person to have status as a tribal member. Degree of blood is calculated by one’s genetic
relationship to ancestors whose bloodlines are documented on a “base roll” — a listing of
tribal membership and blood quanta in a particular year (Garroutte, 2001). Some tribes

require that its citizens possess tribal ancestry and that the ancestry come from a specific

23

parent. For example, the Santa Clara Pueblo (New Mexico) will not enroll children into
the tribe without paternal descent and the Seneca Tribe (New York) requires maternal
descent.

Further complications exist with tribes having differing definitions of who is an
Indian. It is also no secret that within the casino industry an entire hotbed of issues has
opened regarding existing tribes, newly recognized tribes, people attempting to become
tribal members, and tribal members being disenrolled due to political problems and
family disputes. Tribes have the right to determine their own membership. However,
each tribe must be federally and or state recognized in order to be considered a tribe. “A
tribe’s right to define its membership for tribal purposes has long been recognized as
central to its existence as an independent political community” (Santa Clara Pueblo v.
Martinez, as Cited in Starna, 1991).

These modern definitions of blood-quantum identity are based upon theories of
race introduced to Indigenous cultures by Euro—Americans (Garroutte, 2001). According
to Garroutte the original intent of blood quantum distinctions was to have a standard as a
means to liquidate tribal lands and eliminate government responsibility to tribes with
entitlement programs. The assumption was that eventually through intermarriage
Indigenous people would become indistinguishable from all other citizens. Some tribes
have rejected the concept of blood quantum and are merely concerned with a tribal
member establishing lineal (direct) decendency through another tribal member. Several
other tribes practice other methods of membership determination including recognizing
anyone born on the reservation with immediate citizenship, community participation

versus blood quantum, and a vote from the tribal council. Some Nations will only enroll

24

children if parents submit enrollment paperwork after the child’s birth within a certain
time frame.

Every tribe has its own internal laws and nearly all tribes are subject to one or
more federal treaties or statues that deal with the tribe in individualized terms (Wilkinson,
1987). There are over 300 tribes in the lower forty-eight states and 197 in Alaska now
recognized by the federal government; others never have been recognized, and still others
were once recognized but have since had that relationship terminated (Wilkinson, 1987).
The Branch of Acknowledgment and Research (BAR) is charged with reviewing
petitions submitted by unrecognized Indian groups seeking federal acknowledgement
(Starna, 1991).

The ability of tribes to determine their own membership and the lack of
consistency among tribes in doing so leaves the question of “who is Indian?” in the wider
Native community. Without being a tribal member, negotiating the aspect of the
legitimacy one’s identity often poses challenges. These legal criteria have torn apart
family members by pushing out some members and embracing others within the same
family. Legal definitions protect the tribes’ rights to determine the distribution of
resources, including land, tribal monies, casino distributions, political privileges and
other services. However, tribal determination of members is only the beginning of the

complexity of Native identity.

Federal Legal Definitions
While tribes may determine their membership, the federal government must also

be able to distinguish Indians from non-Indians (Garroutte, 2001). In 1978 a US.

25

congressional survey indicated 33 separate definitions of “Indians” which may or may
not correspond with those used by Native Nations within the United States. While the
intricacies involving federal Indian definitions are beyond the scope of this review the
following summation by Garroutte (2001) illuminates the challenges faced by those who
desire to research Native peoples.
Most federal legal definitions of Indian identity specify a particular minimum
blood quantum — frequently one-quarter but sometimes one-half — others do not.
Some require or accept tribal citizenship as a criterion of federal identification,
and others do not. Some require reservation residency or ownership of land held
in trust by the government, and others to not. Many other laws affecting Indians
specify no definition of identity, such that the courses must determine to whom
the laws apply. Because of the wide variation in federal legal identity definitions
and their frequent departure from the various tribal ones, many individuals who
are recognized by their tribes as tribal citizens are nevertheless considered non-
Indian for some or all governmental purposes. The converse can be true as well.
(p. 227).
Tribal citizenry and Federal definitions are so complicated and often conflicted that one
cannot determine a “Native” person from either perspective. While the “laws” of Native
nations and the “laws” of the US. government dictate the “status” of one’s Indianness,
neither grapples with nor distinguishes aspects of Native identity.
The legacy of colonialism left its mark on the Indigenous communities in the
United States, leaving a complex history of tribal people struggling to maintain their
cultural identity. Federal Indian policies convoluted the education of Native people and
established policies that attempted to assimilate, acculturate and erode Native Nations
ways of being. Indigenous people began a social movement to declare their self-
deterrnination. The intent of these organizations was to revitalize and reformulate culture

and tradition. The movement developed shared discourse to enable indigenous activists

to talk across their cultural differences and maintain their own community’s agenda

26

(Smith, 2001). Urbanization and pan-Indianism have resulted from tribal disconnects.
Conventional ethnic identity paradigms do not take into consideration the complexity of

Native identity issues.

27

CHAPTER THREE

CRITICAL REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Contrary to popular belief, education, the transmission and acquisition of knowledge and
skills did not come to the North American continent on the Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria.
We Native Americans have educated our youth through a rich and oral tradition, which
was and is today transmitted by the elders of the tribe.
Dr. Henrietta Whiteman-Mann (1972)
Introduction

The previous chapter set the historical context and current challenges related to
the education of Native people. This chapter will introduce relevant literature and current
trends associated with the education of Indigenous youth emphasizing aspects related to
positive outcomes. This chapter reviews demographic shifts in the United States, federal
initiatives for pre-college and college support programs, campus climate and resilience,
conventional and Indigenous ethnic identity paradigms, conventional and Indigenous
models of teaching and learning, background of the Michigan Indian Leadership Program
and an examination of the researcher’s role.

U.S. Demographic changes, Federal Pre-college and College Initiatives

Demographics in the United States have changed dramatically over the past 40
years. Between 1960 and 1990 the US. population has expanded from 180 to 248
million people (Bureau of Census, 1990). Additionally, the racial composition of the
US. has also changed significantly. The racial percentage of change for minorities grew

from 13% in 1960 (23.5 million people) to 24.7% (61 million people) (Bureau of Census,

1990). American Indians have historically represented the smallest minority population

28

representing only 0.8% (2 million people) of the entire US population (US. Department
of Commerce, 1993).

United States educational systems have had to respond to the Changing US.
population growth. While, minority enrollments in the primary and secondary systems of
education increased, enrollments for minority students were not adequately reflected in
institutions of higher education (US. Department of Commerce, 1993; US. National
Center for Education Statistics, 1995). Colleges and universities have created programs
in response to the needs of various populations including minority students, women, and
disability student services among many others.

Indicated barriers for minority students include lower standardized test scores,
socioeconomic barriers, as well as a myriad of other inadequate access and preparation
concerns. More than half of Hispanic and Native American students are located in 2-year
institutions of higher education (Chronicle of Higher Education, 1998) and are less likely
to complete their degrees (Rendon & Garza, 1996). On behalf of a federal initiative that
was established to ensure equal educational opportunities for students from all racial and
socioeconomic groups (National Council of Educational Opportunity Associations
[NCEOA], 1998); colleges and universities began a variety of programs to address the
needs of first generation, low-income and minority college students. While these
programs augment and supplement what schools do, they do not fundamentally change
the ways schools interact with students (US. Department of Education, 2001) or how
students interact with schools.

The government also sponsored pre-college initiatives that worked to emulate the

features of prep schools, however these programs were conducted outside of the regular

29

school schedule, thus exposing students to the same school regimens that have proven
unsuccessful in the past (US. Department of Education, 2001 ). Intervention programs
help students maximize their assets, expand their goals, and show evidence of doubling
the college-going rate of their participants, but do not appreciably alter their academic
achievement (US. Department of Education, 2001).

The foundation for the Michigan Indian Leadership Program was developed out
of a philosophy that Native people should provide educational assistance and support to
Michigan Indian students attending non-Indian institutions of higher education (Report to

MSU Provost, 1999).

The history of American Indian higher education over the last two
hundred years is one of compulsory Western methods of learning, of recurring
attempts to eradicate tribal culture, and of high dropout rates by American Indian
students at mainstream institutions. In reaction to this history, American Indian
leaders built on the success of the "self-determination" movement of the 19603 to
rethink the role of higher education. Fort Peck Tribal College Website (2004)

Campus Climate and Resilience

Campus climate is defined by Hurtado (1992) as the product of four interrelated
elements: institutional historical legacy of inclusion or exclusion of a given group, its
structural diversity in terms of numerical representation of the ethnic group, perceptions
and attitudes between and among groups, and the behavior dimensions characterized by
intergroup relations on campus. Relationally, these factors may contribute to Native
American students’ sense of alienation and anxiety as they encounter non-Indian students
and faculty that romanticize or stereotype them as Indian people (Hurtado, Milem,
Clayton-Pedersen, & Allen, 1999). Tinto (1975) illuminates issues of retention, which

include issues of prior schooling and preparation, family influences, and individual

30

attributes such as ability, race and gender. All of these factors influence students’ ability
to integrate and commit to their academic institution.

Resilience is the capacity of individuals to overcome personal vulnerabilities and
environmental adversities effectively or the ability to thrive physically and
psychologically despite adverse circumstances (Wang, Haertel, & Walberg, 1994).
Resilience is influenced by environment and may provide some solutions to improving
quality of life and education for minority youth (Wasonga, Christman, & Kilmer, 2003).
Wasonga, et. a1 (2003) further indicate that as students experience home, school, peer,
and community environments rich in the support and opportunities of caring
relationships, high expectations, and opportunities for meaningful participation, they
develop characteristics that define resilience and successful learning. The MILP’s focus
is building on student and family strengths and embraces the student support systems
available at colleges and universities. Georgia Grady Johnson (2003) expresses this
review of the theory of resilience.

Resilience is not an ideal position; it is an attempt to shape and claim an
identity within very difficult personal, tribal, social, and economic systems. I do
not shrug off the emotional pain and harm that can impact American Indian
children if a parent or both parents engage in patterns of alcohol or drug abuse; I
do want to shift from the view of American Indian children living difficult lives as
passive, helpless victims to a view of the children as active, striving participants
in a complex process of identity formation within particular circumstances and
traditions — living their lives as they know them (p. 195).

The MILP program seeks to teach it’s participants skills to endure, thrive and
survive as they learn about and pursue avenues that may have not been revealed to them
before.

The social and academic well-being of Native students is often in jeopardy when

they are separated from support systems such as family, clan, tribe and community.

31

Native students often face difficulty integrating their ethnic identities with their identity
as college students (Garnets & Kimmel, 1991). Urban and off-reservation Indians may
find themselves without the knowledge and connection to their ethnic roots and students
may feel alienated from their school as well as themselves (Atkinson, Morten, & Sue,
1993). Understanding Indigenous students’ ability to navigate cultural and academic
expectations is key in developing programs and strategies that foster Native student

SUCCCSS.

Conventional Ethnic Identity Paradigms

Before describing the paradigms of Native identity, it is first helpful to understand
contemporary psychological theories of ethnic identity in order to recognize the
differences between Native identity theorists and contemporary ethnic identity theorists.
Identity is increasingly recognized as a critical component of the self-concept and, like
other aspects of identity, is of particular importance during adolescence (Inhelder and
Piaget, 1958). Although there is wide agreement that ethnic identity is crucial to the.
psychological well being of ethnic group members, there is little consensus on exactly
what ethnic identity is or how it should be measured (Phinney, 1990). The study of ethnic
identity has been based primarily on two conceptual approaches. In the social identity
approach, Tajfel (1978) focuses on one’s sense of belonging to a group and the attitudes
and feelings that accompany a sense of group membership. The work of Tajfel has
largely been with adults and typically has used experimental paradigms in which
individuals are randomly assigned to groups.

Social identity theory posits that there is an underlying need to maintain self-

esteem and that this need is linked to group identity. Group members are seen as

32

differentiating their own group from other groups and evaluating their own group more
favorably as a means of enhancing their self-concept. One’s identity as a member of a
group is thus Closely linked to self-esteem. An implication of the theory is that an
unfavorable view of one’s own group may be associated with lower self-esteem.
However, social identity theory does not address the question of how such an identity
develops or how it may change over time.

Developmental theories of identity formation suggest that identity forms through
a process of exploration of a commitment or decision in a number of identity domains.
Researchers who have developed models of ethnic or racial identity development that
parallel Erikson’s (1968), include Cross (1991), Helms (1990), Atkinson, Morton & Sue
(1993), and Phinney (1989, 1993). Each of these theorists posits a process beginning
with a lack of awareness or understanding of one’s ethnicity; this has been labeled as
unexamined ethnic identity, or the pre-encounter stage. This initial stage typically ends
when a particular experience makes issues of ethnicity and race more salient. At this
point, individuals engage in a period of exploration to learn more about their groups.
This process can involve reading, talking to people, and participating in a range of
activities that promote group understanding and pride. Ideally, this phase leads to an
achieved ethnic identity characterized by a secure, confident sense of one’s group
membership. This is substantial evidence that an achieved identity is accompanied by
positive attitudes toward one’s group, and there is evidence that it is associated with a
more positive self-concept (Phinney, 1989).

These two theoretical approaches suggest distinct components of ethnic identity;

one consisting of feelings of belonging to a group and attitudes toward it, and another

involving the process by which one examines and comes to understand the meaning of
one’s group membership. Native American identity distinguishes itself from these
models of ethnic identity frameworks, as Indian identity is embedded in political,
historical, cultural, phenotypical, geographical, sociological, ancestral and governmental
relationships. Native identity does not fit neatly into these ethnic identity paradigms,
partially because defining a “Native American” in itself is so complicated. The following

will review the work of Indigenous scholars on American Indian identity theories.

Native Identity from an Indigenous Paradigm

One cannot understand the meaning of any study conducted on Indigenous people
without first understanding at a minimum the complexities of Native identity.
Unfortunately, there is a lack of critical exploration of contemporary Native American
identity (Writer, 2001). The identity of Native people is rooted in the history of
colonization and has created a myriad of intricacies for Native people as individuals and
for tribes. Therefore, the study of Native people cannot be limited to conventional
theories because the experience of Native peoples includes being relocated, dispossessed
of traditional ways, adopted into non-Indian families as well as losing language, culture
and leadership (Anderson, 2000).

Native American identity is a combination of self-identification and the
perceptions of others, and there are wide disputes over who can assert a Native identity
and who has the right to represent Indigenous interests (Weaver, 2001). There are several

ways in which identity impacts individuals and their ability to be successful.

34

Understanding identity from the paradigms of Native researchers will assist with
the analysis and appraisal when determining the significance identity has on the
development and experience of Native students. The complexities of Native identity are
numerous and attempting to claim that this study could globalize into one identity
framework for Native people would be unrealistic. However, understanding the
historical, educational, colonial, political and present day impacts on Native American
people will illuminate the complications with identity and how students make sense of

their experiences.

Research on Native Identity

There is little disagreement that Native identity is complex and controversial.
There are also varying levels of agreement on what comprises an Indigenous identity and
who truly has claim to it. Weaver (2001) poses the identity issues this way:

Are we talking about Indians, American Indians, Native, Native Americans,

Indigenous people, or first nations people? Are we talking about Sioux or

Lakota? Navajo or Dine? Chippewa, Ojibway, or Anishnabe? Once we get that

all sorted out are we talking about race, ethnicity, cultural identity, tribal identity,

acculturation, enculturation, bicultural identity, multicultural identity, or some

other form of identity? (pg. 240).
Weaver (2001) asserts that it is deceiving to assume that all Indigenous people experience
a Native cultural identity in the same way merely because they were born into a Native
community. She further affirms the multilayered nature of identity as some tribal
members may more strongly identify with their clan affiliation, some with the wider tribe
and others with a broader Native or Indigenous identity.

After World War II and during the rise of the civil rights movement, a resurgence

of Native American pride began to develop and among those claiming their proud

35

heritage were those of native descent (Quinn, 1990). According to Quinn, there is a
resurgence of Indian identity or “pan-Indianism” among descendants which has given
rise to at least two negative consequences. First, it has fostered individuals identifying
themselves as Indian whose ancestry has no verification of Indian heritage or whose
claim to Indian ancestry is simply bogus. Second, whether or not there is any Indian
blood in their family lines, most of the culturally non-Indian people identifying as Indian
have distorted notions of Indian cultures, issues, and history (Quinn, 1990).

Some of the conflicts regarding Native identity occur with people who do not
appear phenotypically Native or are not enrolled members of their nation or were not
born on reservations and assert an Indigenous identity (Weaver, 2001). Some Native
people are enrolled tribal members but have very little knowledge about their culture and
also may show little or no interest in learning about their identity as Indigenous people.
Haynes (2001), Horse (1997), Krouse (1999) and Pewewardy (1998) indicate that most
non-Indians define Native people on the basis of individual biological or genetic makeup
(blood quantum) and physical characteristics, whereas most Indian people define
themselves on the basis of their relationship to their specific tribal group, family
membership, and community or location.

Weaver (2001) identifies three levels of Native identity: self-identification,
community-identification, and external identification. Self-identification refers to one’s
self-perception and there may be differing stages of acceptance of one’s Native identity.
Community identification relates to a sense of peoplehood inseparably linked to sacred
traditions. In community identity, identity is shaped and validated by other members of

the community that share the identity. For some, tribal membership or affiliation is the

36

cornerstone of their identification as an Indigenous person. For others, the identification
may be with intertribal or pan-Indian groups. External Native identity references the way
in which identity is defined by Natives and non-Natives. As described earlier the Federal
Government defines Native people differently than some tribes define their membership
and Native nations are not in agreement as to what constitutes a Native person.

Haynes (2001) and Mihesuah (1998) explain Native identity from a constructivist
paradigm. Hayne’s (1997) study explored Oklahoma Cherokee mixed-bloods and found
that individuals’ identities are affected by historical issues and constructs of assimilation
and additional factors such as gender, socio-economic status, blood quantum, skin color,
and the time period in which one was raised. Haynes rejects the stage models of
conventional ethnic identity theorists and rather asserts that Native identity is circular -
more like the Native worldview. Mihesuah (1998) does identify the Native experience in
stages taking into consideration issues of socialization, physical appearance, blood and
cultural heritage, social and political conditions and prejudice and discrimination. These
models are key in understanding that there is not “one” Native experience but many ways
in which Native people define themselves.

Native American culture emphasizes community and collectivity. Therefore,
understanding basic issues of Native identity allow for a greater comprehension of
American Indian students as they navigate the educational and Native worlds.
Individuals who identify as American Indian and have no community sanction or
validation often find problems with being accepted (Weaver, 2001). According to
Mihesuah (1998), the politics of Native identity are embedded in historical and present

day contexts and include issues about how “Indianness” is defined by American Indians

37

and non-Indians. Further, she posits that complexities arise with many individuals
claiming to be Indian who do not phenotypically “look Indian” or those who are not born
into tribal environments. Racial mixing has also complicated Native identity. Marriage
between Europeans and Indigenous people was rewarded by US. government as a way to
assimilate and acculturate Native people (Weaver, 2001).

Various historical assimilationist practices of European contact that include
interracial adoptions, forced attendance of children to boarding schools and other tactics
have fostered these fragile and sometimes volatile concepts of Indigenous identity.
Issues of Native identity impact all people of Native ancestry since the experience of
being Native includes being relocated, dispossessed of traditional ways, adopted into
non-Indian families, as well as the loss of language, culture and leadership (Anderson,
(2000), Johnson, et al., (2003), DeGagné, (2002).

This study explores the relevance of Haynes (2001), Mihesuah (1998) Krouse
(1999) and other Indigenous authors who identify that Indian people define themselves
on the basis of a relationship to their specific tribal group, family and geographical
location. Anderson (2000) identifies a process of “identity recovery” which involves the
reclaiming of native tradition (old ways) and picking up those things that were left

scattered along the path of colonization.

Current Models of Teaching and Learning
The current status quo of teaching in mainstream higher education focuses on an
"instructional paradigm" which is simply that our colleges are institutions that provide

instruction to students (Barr & Tagg, 1995). Barr & Tagg (1995) further posit that the

38

current learning environment, whereby students passively listen to lectures, is counter to
almost every optimal learning principle. Fenstermacher and Soltis (1992) identify the
expert and executive approaches which support the teacher as the executor of the
classroom. In our present day institutions of higher learning, this is still the prevalent
teaching approach, particularly at research institutions. Freire (1970) interprets the
teacher-centered style as being one of a banking system. Freire asserts that education is
an act of depositing, in which the students are the depositories and the teacher is the
depositor. In this situation the student's role is to patiently receive, memorize, and repeat.
The organizational frameworks from which we operate are typically bureaucratic
and structural in nature. As we seek out new methods of administering and governing
our institutions of higher education, we can look to O'Banion (1997) to remind us of the
many educational efforts that have already taken place. O'Banion (1997), along with
others, indicates that we must do away with traditional approaches to teaching and begin
restructuring the architecture of education around placing learning first (Palmer, 1998;
Barr & Tagg, 1999; Freire, 1970; hooks, 1994; Fenstermacher & Soltis, 1992). Many of
the current teaching and learning theorists are proponents of learner-centered teaching.
There is much discussion occurring about entering the twenty-first century with new
paradigms for teaching and learning. The focus is now changing from models that
sustain the teacher as expert to approaches that actively engage the learner. Furthermore,
arguments are being presented that institutions need to make paradigmatic shifts
throughout the entire institution (Senge, 1990; Apps, 1998). The development of the

Michigan Indian Leadership Program took into consideration the differences in learning

39

styles for Native youth and challenged the appropriateness of the teacher-centered style

of educating.

Indigenous Models of Teaching and Learning

What is culturally responsive teaching and education from an Indigenous
perspective and how do we achieve it? The boarding school era’s attempt to eradicate
language and culture have left Native people with an aftermath of poverty and social ills
and provided the misconception that Native youth come from deficient circumstances and
cannot be expected to succeed (Strand & Peacock, 2002). Indigenous value systems have
always included the concepts of giving and sharing (Shutiva, 2001) and focused on
spirituality, and mental, emotional and physical well-being (HeavyRunner & Morris,
1997). Indigenous people have clung to ways of fostering resilience and self-esteem in
Native youth by methods that include promoting a sense of belonging, cultivating
spiritual, mental, emotional and physical mastery, encouraging individual freedom with
appropriate self-management and giving back to the community (Brendtro, Brokenleg, &
Van Bockem, 1990). However, these innate systems of fostering resilience among
Indigenous youth have not been translated into culturally responsive teaching for Native
students.

In general, culturally responsive teaching refers to utilizing a child’s culture to
build a bridge to success in school achievement. This cultural literacy is often absent in
mainstream classrooms, where the majority of American Indian students are taught by
non-Native teachers (Pewewardy & Hammer, 2003). Several studies have identified that

Native students gain in academic achievement from instruction that includes

40

observational and collaborative activities and in which information is presented
holistically and with visual aids (Hilberg & Tharp, 2002). Incorporating knowledge of
Indigenous learning styles and cultural ways of being was the foundation behind the
emergence of the Michigan Indian Leadership Program.

Friere (1970) contends that regarding one's level of oppression, every person is
capable of perceiving personal and social reality as well as the contradictions in it and
developing concrete skills for thinking critically, provided they are given the proper tools.
These tools, he alleges, are more effectively presented by a "peasant" or peer rather than
from an outside “teacher.” This philosophy supports the Michigan Indian Leadership
Program’s attempt to educate Native American youth and also support the move toward
fostering learner-centered pedagogy. Since mainstream institutions of higher learning
have failed to educate Native people in significant numbers, it is appropriate that

American Indian people take the education of their people into their own hands.

The Michigan Indian Leadership Program

In 1998 the MILP program emerged from a Native professional’s observation that
there were many programs designed to encourage and support minority students into
higher education, but Native students were not attending them. Eva Menefee
conceptualized a program that would provide an academic experience and exposure to
higher education with grounding in Indigenous values and culture. It was her goal to
demonstrate to Native youth that they could better their lives without compromising their
cultures. It was also her intent to engage Native youth who lost their Indigenous ways in

Indigenous teachings so they could reclaim their stories and traditions in a non-

4l

threatening and supportive environment. Yazzie (2002) indicates that for educators to
embody this culturally responsive method of teaching/program development the
teachers/facilitators must assert themselves within their community. They need to go
home — physically, philosophically, spiritually, and intellectually living their culture
everyday of their lives. It is this culturally responsive method of leadership that allows
Native students to become a conscious part of the learning, as the facilitator is driving the
curriculum/instruction from a place deep within. Gilbert (2000) identifies the importance
of institutions of higher education establishing a more pro-active role with tribal people
by cultivating educational partnerships with tribes and nations. These partnerships could
allow for the support of American Indian students and provide a bridge to living in both
worlds - Native and non-Native.

The Michigan Indian Leadership Program (MH.P) was implemented in the
summer of 1998 in response to the concern that American Indian students were not being
prepared to enter higher education. Eva Menefee, the program founder, built partnerships
with Michigan State University and other funding agencies to provide a program
initiative that served middle and high school Native students in bridging the academic

and cultural gap to college.

MILP Concept, Design and Background
The Michigan Indian Leadership Program was developed to promote educational
resilience and leadership development for Native American students throughout the state
of Michigan. The program’s focus was to support Native students at various levels of

cultural competency and to provide a culturally responsive educational environment.

42

The Michigan Indian Leadership Program is an original design based on the
culture and values of Indigenous people. Since most of the tribal people from Michigan
are of the Three Fires (Potawotomie, Odawa and Ojibwe) many of the cultural
components of the MILP are geared toward this population. However, MILP was
designed to support the experiences of reservation, off-reservation, urban, rural and
mixed-blood students. The MILP took into consideration that the future of Indian
Country is increasingly diverse and the leadership needed to guide Native people will
need to be representative of its own people. Native people believe that every individual
has an obligation to leave the earth better for the next seven generations and it is MILP’s
intent to develop strong, leaders grounded in their culture to encourage the survival of
Indian people.

The number of students in the program has varied, but in the last five years the
program has brought about 20-30 students to campus every summer. The number has
been kept small so that students receive adequate mentoring time with their Peer-Mentor.
American Indian college students served as Peer-Mentors. The academic enrichment
component of Michigan Indian Leadership Program had four major categories: cultural
activities, leadership development, workshops/seminars, and academic exposure. Each
type of activity had a different function within the structure of the program, but all
activities exposed participants to critical thinking skills, higher education, and skill
building techniques that take place in education.

The cultural components of the MILP were multi-layered and built into every
component of the program’s design. Cajete (2000) describes education in the following

manner. “Education involves a constant flow of information and is multigenerational and

cross-generational: young teach old; old teach young; sister teaches younger sister;
brother teaches younger brother; aunts, grandmas, and grandpas teach Children” (p. 101).
The program has Native American college students that served as Peer-Mentors to the
youth participants, as well as an elder who lived-in the residence hall and conducted
some of the traditional workshops and ceremonies. Other cultural components of the
program included traditional Native sports games, talking circles, relocation reenactment
project, tobacco project play, pow wow. Each day opened with a sunrise ceremony.
MILP was conceptualized as a circle of collaboration that includes the MILP youth,
parents, college-age Peer-Mentors, program coordinators, elders, university partnerships
and community members. This leadership development model, which is elaborated on in
Chapter Five, replicates a traditional tribal community in which both the youth and the
Peer-Mentors progress is supervised and supported by several people within the
community. The program was designed to cultivate the student’s traditional worldview
and spiritual understanding as the foundation for their development. The program’s
design encourages relationships to extend beyond the one-week summer experience.
Peer-Mentors and the coordinator serve as points of contact throughout the academic year
for the youth. The Peer-Mentors have accessibility to the coordinator as well for personal
assistance and mentoring. Several of the Peer-Mentors attend/ed the same university and
continue to serve as a social support network throughout the academic years and beyond.

The present study used a qualitative research design. In the summer of 2003, in
the role of a researcher, I lived in as a member of the MILP program. I have participated
in the MILP program since its inception in 1988, serving as a MH.P Peer Mentor until

1992, when I was graduated from MSU. I left MSU to attend graduate school in Rhode

Island, but I continued coming back to the MILP program, serving as the “Dean of
Students” and a trainer to the Peer Mentors. I did this from 1994-1996. In 1997, the
founder, Eva Menefee, and her coordinator-husband, Robin Menefee, informed me that
they would no longer be running the MILP program. Up until this point volunteers had
run the program with little financial compensation for any of the staff. After nearly ten
years, the program was being left to expire.

After completing my Master’s degree, I chose to come back to MSU to pursue a
Ph.D. program. I decided that I would lobby MSU in an attempt to have MILP
institutionalized as a regular programming effort of MSU. First attempts were
unsupported by both MSU and the MSU Native American community. However,
Lansing Community College (LCC) was extremely supportive, and in 1997 we ran the
MILP as usual through MSU with considerable financial support from LCC. After a
successful year with LCC’s support, MSU once again picked up a significant portion of
the financial and administrative support and integrated the MILP into the King, Chavez,
Parks Program. The KCP Program handled other minority higher education recruitment
camps, but did not have strong representation from the Native community.

Upon integration into the KCP, the MILP had concerns with physical space.
Although the MH.P became part of the KCP Program in 1998, it did not receive physical
space in the KCP offices until 2002. As in the past, the MILP was run out of people’s
homes and borrowed space and resources from its partner institutions (Michigan State
University and Lansing Community College). In 2002, MSU hired a full-time staff
person to run the MILP, although the program had to find significant outside funding

sources in order to survive. The MILP today is a weeklon g residence program for eighth

45

through twelfth grade Native American students from around the state of Michigan,

including the Upper Peninsula, as well as Canada.

The Role of the Researcher

Qualitative research and specifically ethnographic methods rely on what the
researcher sees and interprets. Indigenous people are particularly concerned about the
abuses that researchers have inflicted on tribal nations throughout history. This study
follows closely the protocol that Native communities are seeking — to seek and analyze
data from an Indigenous paradigm. Those who conduct research must be aware of their
postionality in relation to their research participants, their level of objectivity in getting,
analyzing and reporting data, and how various research methods may influence their
work. Researchers in Indigenous communities must guard against the imposition of
methods of collecting, analyzing, and reporting the “fact” in ways that are not culturally
sensitive and that fail to safeguard the lives of the people they study (Brayboy & Deyhle,
2000).

The investigator’s contribution to the research setting can be useful and positive
rather than detrimental (Locke, Spirduso, & Silverman, 1987). The role of the researcher
as the primary data collection instrument necessitates the identification of personal
values, assumptions and biases at the outset of the study (Creswell, 1994). Since I have
been affiliated with the MILP program since its inception, I believe my role enhances my
awareness and understanding of many of the issues that arise for the program and the

students. However, I recognize that I also bring certain biases to the study which may

46

have an effect on the way I interpret the data. Every effort will be made to ensure

objectivity and the several methods of data collection will be triangulated.

Summary

While tribes have the ability to determine their own membership, Native people
are in disagreement how “Indian” is defined. Recognizing the need for an environment
that supports Indigenous students, the Michigan Indian Leadership Program was
developed and designed to encourage Native youth to discover and deepen their sense of
culture and exploration of education. The Michigan Indian Leadership Program is
composed of American Indian college age students who train together and then act as
Peer-Mentors for Michigan American Indian youth. Over the years, MILP has been
expanded and changed to meet the diversifying needs of American Indian youth and
college students, but it still maintains its core value system and goals.

The goal of the MILP is to educate Native youth and introduce them to college
experiences while providing leadership training. The camp provides hands-on
experience, self-exploration, and lecture opportunities. The organization started out
small and has grown since its origination in 1988. Over the years its size has depended
upon funding and has ranged from 20-120 students in a given summer. Throughout its

work, the program has kept pace with the changing needs of its clientele.

47

CHAPTER FOUR

METHODOLOGY

Introduction

Before embarking on yet another study of American Indian people, this researcher
took into consideration the historical controversy that research has had on the overall
Indigenous populations of this world. Indigenous scholars are frustrated with the level of
“expertise” that non-Indians claim to have about Indian people. Research with
Indigenous people has often been intrusive and not to the benefit of the community being
studied. Devon Mihesuah and Angela Cavender Wilson (2002), American Indian
scholars and activists, write:

Native intellectuals insist that scholars be accountable to tribes for how they

portray their histories and cultures. We also argue that work published on Natives

should be for the benefit of Natives, not just for the author. Those who maintain
the colonial power structure, however, do not want to connect the past to the
present, use Native perspectives in their data-collecting or analyses, or utilize

Indigenous scholars’ theories. Instead they either focus their research on Natives

of the past with no concern for their descendents, or they analyze modern Natives

using white theories that usually have no basis in reality. Those of us in the
academy who are adamant that we have enough information about Natives from
the white perspective will therefore continue to face obstacles, both blatant and

secretive (p. 146).

This study has been influenced by the scholarship of Indigenous researchers including
Maenette Benham, Angela Cavender Wilson, Vine Deloria, Susan Applegate. Krouse,
Tsianiana Lomawaima, Devon A. Mihesuah, Michael Pavel, Wayne Stein, Karen G.
Swisher and emerging scholars Bryan Brayboy, Michael DeGagne’ and Tarajean Yazzie.
It is this researcher’s attempt to conduct a study that is as meaningful and valuable to

those being researched as it is to the researcher. The methodologies selected took into

consideration approaches that support Indigenous paradigms.

48

There is a demand for research on Native American communities that attends to
the diversity within the population and is conducted by Native researchers (Chavers,
2000). Qualitative research challenges the “science” in the social and natural sciences
and can make the difference between a project that serves the Native community and
strengthens sovereignty or actively undermines both (Lomawaima & McCarty, 2002).
Researchers must be aware of how those we study view us [as researchers] and how we
view them (Brayboy & Deyhle, 2000). In exploring people’s experiences, this study
utilized methodology that is grounded holistic inquiry. Therefore, this study utilized
methods that were qualitative and phenomenological in nature.

This chapter describes the methods and procedures used for this study. It details
the descriptions of the population, sample of participants, instrumentation used for data
collection, as well as consideration of human subjects and other information associated
with the study.

The study examined a one-week, summer, pre—college, cultural enrichment camp
in order to explore the role that pre-college programs have in promoting and supporting
the education of American Indian youth. Additionally, this study examined higher
education participants or graduates who participated in the MILP between the years of
1988 and 2002. The student participants in this study had, in common, the experience of
attending the same pre-college, cultural enrichment camp in their youth, attending post-
secondary education and serving as MILP Peer-Mentors during their college years. The
MILP recruited mostly underrepresented American Indian youth whose opportunities and

experiences with higher education were very limited.

49

Research Questions
The study had two primary purposes. The first purpose was to gain an
understanding of the MILP’s history, mission, and evolution. Second, the study sought
information that would lead to a greater understanding of Native American students’
experiences and the contribution of pre-college, cultural and academic intervention
programs. The study sought to answer the following questions:

What were the outcomes and experiences of youth that participated in the
Michigan Indian Leadership Program?

How do American Indian college students who participated in MILP navigate
cultural and academic expectations?

Research Design, Procedures and Context

Qualitative methods were used for data collection in this study. A qualitative
study is an inquiry process of understanding a social or human problem, based on
building a complex, holistic picture, formed with words, reporting detailed views of
participants, and conducted in a natural setting (Creswell, 1994). Research consisted of
several levels of data collection including observational experiences; field texts and
archival materials; non-structured, non-tape recorded one-on-one interviews with MILP
youth participants, workshops instructors and community members; journal writings from
youth participants and Peer Mentors; photographs; and personal one-on-one, tape-
recorded interviews with past and present program leadership and past MILP participants.
In addition, non-structured follow-up interviews were conducted for points of
clarification and occurred over the phone, Internet (instant messaging, email), and in

person.

50

This study explored the lived experience of people, and data were analyzed and
assessed from an interpretivist paradigm. Interpretive researchers approach participants
not as individuals who live in a vacuum, but within the context of their entire lives. They
seek to understand how participants construct the world around them. In all of the data
collection, an importance was placed upon allowing the participants to create their own
view of the experiences that have influenced their lives. From an Indigenous perspective
it is important to honor the oral traditions.

For many Indigenous writers, stories are ways of passing down the beliefs
and values of a culture in the hope that the new generations will treasure them and
pass the story down further. The story and the story teller both serve to connect
the past with the future, one generation with the other, the land with the people
and the people with the story (Smith, 2001 p. 144).

Archival Materials and Notes

Archival materials consisted of past materials and documentation regarding the
Michigan Indian Leadership Program. Some materials were retrieved from former
offices used at partnership institutions as well as from attics and garages of the homes of
people formerly affiliated with the program. All documentation has been turned into the
current program office for archiving. Field notes consisted of reflective essays, notes,
and journal entries as well as photographs written or taken by the researcher. These notes

shaped the researcher’s initial impressions and served as a reminder of details,

discussions and experiences not recorded elsewhere.

Non-structured, Non-Recorded Interviews
These interviews/questions took place immediately after the researcher moved

into the MILP residence hall and continued throughout the entire study. Often questions

51

were asked to seek further information regarding a person’s thoughts, experiences, and
background. These conversations were numerous and were not recorded in a specific
manner, but notes were taken when relevant to the study. The questions were not limited
to anyone in particular and occurred with parents of the MILP participants, community
members, other camp members participating in the same residence hall, as well as with

previous interviewees.

Confidentiality
Interviewees completed consent forms are located in Appendix B and were
assured of confidentiality, although it was acknowledged that due to the small nature of
the Michigan Native American community their identity could be revealed. Parents and
students of the program completed consent forms as part of the camp’s routine program
evaluation collection process and were collected by the MSU King, Chavez, Parks

Program.

Consideration of Human Subjects
The use of human subjects for this study was given considerable thought
especially since the researcher was working with American Indian students and youth.
Several levels of consent were required. First, human subject approval was received by
the researcher to observe the camp and interview participants. In addition, permission
was granted by the KCP program Director for me to live-in and participate in the research
collection procedures. Finally, I also served as one of the researchers for data normally

collected by MILP for purposes of program evaluation.

52

Observations — Setting and Context

Observations of the Michigan Indian Leadership Program were conducted in the
following manner.

The researcher moved into the Michigan Indian Leadership Program residence
hall on Friday, July 18, 2003, with all of the Peer Mentors; and the coordinator,
Michaelina Magnuson, and began a series of staff training, group development and team
building exercises. The researcher utilized the form in Appendix C to record
observations and feelings and kept a daily research journal. Non-structured interviews
began on the first day and continued throughout the entire camp experience and after.
The staff training lasted for two days; a schedule is located in Appendix D. On Sunday,
July 20, the MILP youth participants moved into the residence hall at Michigan State
University. The students were separated by gender, with the males located on the first
floor and the females located on the third floor. MILP Peer Mentors lived on each floor
with the students. The researcher lived on the third floor with the female students.

During orientation, the coordinator, Ms. Magnuson, explained the role that I
would have as a researcher. She asked me to speak for a few minutes about my past
relationship with the program and about the research and this study. The researcher was
previously known to many of the students and was immediately treated like one of the
“family.” As the researcher, I attempted to merely “observe” and not participate in the
activities of the camp. This was a short-lived attempt. Bryan Brayboy (2000) articulated
this paradox, “For insiders, whose membership in the group comes with obligations, it is

difficult to simply observe. As insiders in Indigenous communities, if we do more

53

9”

observation than participation, the participants may view us as ‘stuck up. On a couple
of occasions, I needed to leave the camp during some of the daily activities, but returned
for dinner. The Peer Mentors and several of the students with whom I now lived were
very upset and questioned where I had been and why I had left. Then they proceeded to
inform me of how much fun I missed at various activities.

The researcher also trained and utilized the resources of one Peer Mentor as a
research assistant to help with observations. This was done for several reasons. First,
many of the activities were rather large and the researcher could not observe activities
from every angle. The research assistant’s observations were used in collaboration with
the researcher’s to determine information that might have been missing. Additionally,
this also provided the ability to triangulate the data collected in observation format for
accuracy. Finally, when there were multiple activities occurring concurrently, we were
able to get notes on more than one activity. The researcher’s observations, however,
were the primary sources for data reporting. The research assistant’s notes were used to

add or clarify points that the researcher may have missed. It also provided an opportunity

for discussion of events and a synthesis of ideas.

Journal Writings
Each MILP youth participant kept a journal at camp. The journal was collected
every night and read by the Peer-Mentors. The following day a prize was given for the
most thoughtful reflection and the entry was shared with the MILP community, if the

student permitted. The Peer Mentors also were asked to answer specific questions

54

pertaining to their MILP experiences. The researcher was given access to these journals

and writings.

Photographs
Photography and video recording were always a part of the camp experience.
Memories have been shared since the MILP’s inception by producing slide shows,
yearbooks, and homemade videos. The researcher took several hundred photographs of
the MILP program over a period of fourteen years. While the photos will not be depicted
in this study, they were useful in reviewing and assisted in conceptualizing the data

analysis.

Selection of the Student Interview Participants
On one occasion I met with MILP founder Eva Menefee for the purpose of

generating names of possible interview candidates. I sought former MILP participants
who had attended or graduated from some aspect of post-secondary education. Eleven
names were generated. I took the list to current coordinator Michaelina Magnson for
review. We added one additional person to the list. Four names were dropped because
they had moved outside of the state of Michigan and could not be located. Eight names
remained. All eight students were contacted by the researcher and agreed to be in the

study.

55

One-on-One Personal Interviews

Individual interviews were conducted with selected participants and were guided
by the appropriate protocols found in Appendix E. Individual interviews were conducted
with the MILP founder Eva Menefee and current coordinator Michaelina Magnuson. The
researcher met with both Ms. Menefee and Ms. Magnuson in two separate meetings. The
student interviews were conducted with eight individuals. One of the interviews was
conducted at the MILP camp, two were conducted at the home of the researcher, one at
the researcher’s office, one in Northern Michigan on a reservation, one in Canada on a
reservation, one in the office of a participant and one at a pow wow.

The interviews were in-depth, phenomenological interviews. The goal was to
have one interview with a follow up interview if necessary. Follow-up interviews were
not audio recorded and consisted of questions asked over the phone, over the Internet
[instant messaging, email], or in person. The interviews were approximately one hour in
length, audio taped and transcribed. Six were transcribed by the researcher, and four
were transcribed by a professional transcriber and reviewed by the researcher for
accuracy and corrected as necessary. The interviews and transcriptions were kept in a
locked file cabinet with the researcher. Each interview followed a general protocol;
however, as the initial research questions sparked discussion, new questions emerged out
of that process. Open-ended questions made way for more detailed, intimate questions
and responses. The interview protocol allowed each participant to discuss her/his
educational and MILP experiences and provided the interviewee flexibility in controlling
the content. Each participant wove her/his own intricate stories of educational

experiences while sharing thoughts, strategies, successes, conflicts, families, histories and

56

tragedies. Participants were assured that they could choose to withdraw or not answer

questions at any point during the interview process.

Native Setting

Native Americans educators and scholars have long advocated that education be
respectful of, and appropriate to, the lives of American Indian students and incorporate
Indigenous cultures and languages. Indigenous scholars have verified that having
consciousness of specific tribal contexts is crucial in producing useful findings with
Native groups (Swisher, 1998). Grounding the educational experience in the context of
one’s language and culture correlates with healthy identity formation and academic
success (Bamhardt, 1999; Cleary & Peacock, 1998; McCarty, et al., 1991). The
Michigan Indian Leadership Program must be recognized not only for what it was and
intended, but for who the participants of the program were. The camp participants were
primarily members of the Michigan tribes, the Potawotomie, Odawa, and Ojibwe, known
as the People of the Three Fires. Within this group, however, were non-Three Fires
participants. Additionally, the diversity within the Michigan Indian community that
attends this camp must be recognized.

MILP camp participants consisted of mixed-blood and full-blood students from
reservation, off-reservation and urban areas. The issue of the mixed-blood students is
rather complex. Mixed-blood students came from backgrounds that were Native and
Caucasian; Native and Black; Native and Hispanic; and Native and Other. Many mixed—
blood students who came to the MILP identified primarily with their Native heritage. A

few mixed-blood students identified primarily with their non-Indian heritage and came to

57

MILP to explore their Indian identity. Mixing urban, reservation, off-reservation, mixed
blood and full-blood students has proved to be a significant challenge over the years.
Therefore, the MILP did not focus on Indigenous language or specific cultural issues
because of the diversity represented. While this program was a Native one, out of
necessity it maintained a more “Pan-Indian” atmosphere and encouraged activities and
traditions that most tribes practice. The MILP needed to be sensitive to the needs of the
participants, MILP’s own relationships to the Michigan tribes, the urban Indian

communities, and to Michigan State University.

Consideration of Qualitative Findings
In analyzing and interpreting data, the researcher worked to triangulate the
archival materials, field-texts, notes, observation notes, interview transcripts, photographs
and other materials to ensure the validity of interpretations. Triangulation strengthens the
design and adds to the trustworthiness of the research. Using multiple items for analysis
assisted in identifying common themes among the various data (Fontana & Frey, 1994;

J anesick, 1994).

Data Analysis
The data collected in the forms of observations, archival materials, field texts,
notes, interviews, journal writings, and photographs revealed connections between the
intentions of the Michigan Indian Leadership Program and the outcomes experienced by
American Indian students. The observational data revealed the program in action and

provided insight into protocol for the interviews. Living-in the program served as a

58

reminder of the MILP’s values and the struggle it had in balancing the dynamic needs of
a diverse Native community. The analysis included detemrining patterns and emerging
themes. There are significant data that did not directly relate to the themes of this
dissertation. Those data have been locked in a file cabinet to be used for future studies
described in Chapter Five.

Each level of data collection came with a richness that could have been its own
study. The interviews alone could have changed the focus of this study to merely
examine the academic experience of Indigenous students. Rather, as I kept synthesizing
through the various methods of data, I realized that these were bound together to explain
that none of these students would have entered college without the intervention of the
MILP and, therefore, the MILP served as the catalyst for students to consider academia.
Further, all interviewees returned to the camp as college students to serve as Peer-
Mentors and participated in MILP’s leadership development training which served as a

retention effort in their college experience.

Role as the Researcher
It has been challenging understanding my own role and experiences with the
Michigan Indian Leadership Program. I was on the first Peer Mentor team under the
founder, Eva Menefee, in 1988. I had just completed my freshman year at Michigan
State University. I recognize that being a Peer Mentor taught me valuable leadership
skills and an appreciation for education that have carried me throughout my life today.
This study has been an ongoing negotiation in which I have challenged my own views

and kept them in perspective with those that I observed and interviewed. Additionally, I

59

feel tremendous gratitude for the MILP as it has served as a catalyst for my entering
graduate school and now serves as the topic for my dissertation. Students who came
through the camp with me as their Peer Mentor and eventually as their coordinator have
touched my life in a remarkable way.

I approach this analysis as a mixed-blood woman raised off—reservation. This
strengthened and informed the types of questions that emerged and how I interpreted
them. Therefore, it is important for me to state overt biases that I may have as an
outsider/insider by recording my first impressions, reactions, and perspectives as I
experienced the various research settings. According to Brayboy (2000):

‘Insiders’ writing ethnographic accounts of their own group have issues with

which they must deal, but these issues do not mean they cannot conduct good,

rigorous research. Rather, they must address the issues in a manner that shows

integrity and an awareness of some of the complicated issues facing them (p. 4).
Swisher (1998) further expands this by indicating:

How can an outsider really understand life on reservation, the struggle for

recognition, sovereignty, economic development, preservation of language and

culture? Perhaps they can gain a high degree of empathy as act as ‘brokers’ of
sorts, but it takes American Indians and Alaska Natives themselves to understand
the depth of meaning incorporated in Indian education to ask appropriate

questions and find appropriate answers (p. 72).

A3 a researcher using various qualitative and ethnographic methods including archival
materials, field texts journal entries, observations, photographs, and interviews, the
creation and interpretation of these data are central to my relationship with each
participant being studied. Connelly and Clandinin (1994) indicate that in qualitative
methods there is a relationship between the researcher and the participants, and that

issues of voice arise for both. These authors describe this dilemma in the following

manner.

60

This struggle for research voice is captured by the analogy of living on a knife
edge as one struggles to express one’s own voice in the midst of an inquiry
designed to capture the participants’ experience and represent their voices, all the
while attempting to create a research text that will speak to and reflect upon the
audience’s voices (p. 423).
Further adding to the tenuous condition of issue of voice, I also must consider the issues
involved in being a “Native” researcher studying my own community as well as how I
am positioned within this community.

Villenas (1996) identifies that the “Native” ethnographer must negotiate her own
marginalized experienced as she is potentially both “colonizer, in her university cloak”
and the “colonized, as a member of the very community that is made other in her
research.” I am balancing this delicate line as well as negotiating my place as an
emerging Native scholar. Additionally, challenging the research process, Villenas (1996)
indicates that ethnographers are like the colonizers; and if we fail to question our own
identities and privileged positions, we perpetuate “Othering” in our writing. Othering
refers to writing essays that subjugate the “others” (participants) as if they were a
homogeneous mass severed from contexts of oppression. In understanding voice, I have
long known that l have a responsibility that has grown and developed as I have become
more knowledgeable about the MILP program.

The stories told to me were revealed at a depth beyond the scope of “researcher-
interviewee.” The participants were my past students in the MILP and I have known
them since they were children. Several call me “auntie” or “cousin” and have established
a familial relationship with me, and I now have social and cultural responsibilities to

adhere to. These students allowed me to share in their lives and explore their life

experiences in ways that I never anticipated. The occasion to observe these students in

61

their youth and interview them in their adulthood as they reflected on their academic
experiences gave light to the challenges and obstacles that Indigenous students face on a
daily basis. Moreover, their candidness revealed resiliencies and strengths of students
who the literature would say were “at risk” or should not have made it. But they did
make it, and while their path may not have been the straightest and shortest, it was a path
nonetheless. It is my hope that these findings serve to illumine the trail for the next

generation of educators and students embarking on higher education.

Summary
To understand the nature of Native philosophy, we must first understand a Native

person in the context of her/his relationships and place within the world. The practice of
Native science -- the more humans know about themselves and their connections to
everything around them -- gives way to more comfort in knowing and being, and it
includes the relationship to time and space and between living and nonliving things
(Cajete, 2000). It includes the psychological and spiritual and is inclusive of all the ways
that humans are capable of knowing and understanding the world (Cajete, 2000).

This study examined the academic experiences of American Indian students who
participated in one or more pre-college cultural and academic enrichment camps during
grades 6 to 12. This inquiry examined the educational experience of Native American
students and uncovered areas of academic motivation, career and college choice, barriers
and contributors to success, and the navigation between cultural expectations and

academic responsibilities.

62

Until now, the effects of this cultural and academic program have not been
documented; however, the voice of Native students has demonstrated this program has
supported and encouraged many Native American students in their pursuit of higher
education. This study now serves as evidence supporting this observation and intends to
provide further confirmation of the importance of pre-college, cultural and academic

enrichment programs in the lives of Native American students.

63

CHAPTER FIVE

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

In our every deliberation we must consider
the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations
- From the great law of the Iroquois confederacy

Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to introduce and exemplify findings of an
exploration of the pre-college, cultural Michigan Indian Leadership Program (MILP) and
the students who attended it. This chapter introduces the author’s findings from
interviews, camp observations, and written work, including journal entries of both MILP
participants and MILP Peer-Mentors. This analysis of data and written materials led to
the discovery of several themes. The findings will describe ways in which Native youth
are shaped, encouraged, supported and developed by their own community through
higher education initiatives. This research identified a program, initiated by an American
Indian leader, that encouraged the development and promotion of Indigenous leadership
through education. Through investigation seven major themes emerged: Native
Leadership; Community Building; Perceptions of Identity; Importance of Culture;
Mentoring, Career Choice and Motivation; and Navigating Culture and Higher Education
as well as the subthemes of academics, multiple support services, financial support, the
role of faculty, social support, organizations, family, resiliency to drugs and alcohol, and

participant connections.

64

The program founder, Eva Menefee, indicated that while she worked at MSU as
an employee, she saw the numbers of Native American college applications increase
along with the number of Indians who were admitted after the start of the MILP program.
Further, she indicated that past MILP participants were admitted every year to MSU as
freshman. The problem with this information is that it is not quantitatively documented
anywhere. While it was not the goal of this dissertation to provide quantitative
documentation of MILP, it is a strong recommendation that a future study be conducted
to document the program’s contribution in this manner.

This study examined the Michigan Indian Leadership Program on several levels
in order to ascertain the role that pre-college programs have in promoting and supporting
the education of American Indian youth. Additionally, this study explored the
experiences of higher education participants or graduates who participated in the pre-
college MILP summer camp experience between the years of 1988-2002. Therefore, the
student participants in this study had, in common, the experience of attending the same
pre-college, cultural enrichment camp in their youth, attending post—secondary education
and serving as Peer-Mentors during their college years.

The study had two primary purposes. The first purpose was to gain an
understanding of the MILP’s history, mission, and evolution. Second, the study sought
information that would lead to a greater understanding of Native American students’
experiences and the contribution of pre-college, cultural and academic intervention
programs. The overall focus of this study was to explore the following:

What were the outcomes and experiences of youth that participated in the
Michigan Indian Leadership Program?

65

How do American Indian college students who participated in MILP navigate
cultural and academic expectations?

The Michigan Indian Leadership Program was founded with a central purpose to
develop Michigan Indian youth into future Native leaders by exposing them to higher
education (Report to MSU Provost, 1999). It was reported during the interviews with
participants that the MILP served as a catalyst for each participant to attend higher
education as well as served to build upon students’ cultural leadership experiences.
During the data analysis, findings emerged that revealed the ways in which Indigenous
leadership is developed and how it is incorporated into the academic life cycle of Native
students. Many studies have presented a rationale for supporting Native culture in the
classroom (Cleary & Peacock, 1998; McDiarmid, Kleinfeld, & Parrett, 1998) but none
have identified the importance of developing Native leaders within the educational
experience. The MILP promoted more Indigenous students into higher education and
then followed up by utilizing those MILP students as Peer Mentors once they attended
college. Each interviewee had, in common, the experience of participating in a Native
youth camp and serving as a Peer-Mentor while a college student. In the interviews with
participants, the researcher asked questions regarding several aspects of the interviewees’
lives as they related to their experiences in higher education and with the Michigan
Indian Leadership Program. Their stories speak to their experiences with the MILP as
well as to the various events that have influenced their academic lives. Detailed

description of interviewees is located in Appendix F.

66

Researcher’s Daily Observations

The following is a summary of the researcher’s daily reflections at they related to
observations for the 2003 summer Michigan Indian Leadership Program. These
observations illuminated the importance of the camp in the lives of both participants and
the Peer Mentors and a demonstrated the community building and leadership
development aspects of the program. Youth participants reported leaving their camp
experience with higher education exposure and with Native student role models [Peer
Mentors] actively engaged in the learning process with them. Peer Mentors and
participants both attended study skills development seminars, career exploration
workshops and other skill development activities. All people, youth, Peer Mentors and
leadership of the MILP were provided the opportunity to experience new learning in
relation to themselves, their culture and their own leadership development and

community responsibility.

Researcher’s Reflections

It was a hot July day when I moved into the residence hall that would house the
2003 Michigan Indian Leadership Program. This was the first time that I had attended
the program without having some official capacity as Peer Mentor, coordinator or other
leadership role. I unpacked my suitcases in an unventilated room located on the third
floor of an MSU Residence Hall. I knew this would be a hot week with lots of activities,
and I prepared by bringing fans and cool clothing. In some ways, I reminisced about the
good old days of being a Peer Mentor. A3 a Peer Mentor, I had my own group of 7-10

students — little minds that I could expose to new thoughts and ideas. I always enjoyed

67

watching the children come the first day, scared and unsure of themselves, and then being
responsible for developing them into cohesive group. The last day of camp was always
filled with tears, yearbook signings, and phone number exchanges. Technology has
advanced us so now we exchange email and cell-phones as well. While at the program, I
took notes on every activity I observed as well as completed journal entries. Appendix C
is the form that was used in this data collection method. The following summaries are

from those writings.

Day 1 Friday: Staff Training

The staff checked in and moved into the residence hall. They were responsible
for program logistics like picking up vans and preparing materials. The first night the
nervous Peer Mentors had a retreat overview that included the goals and history of the
program as well as rules and regulations. I assisted with the history aspect and put
together a PowerPoint presentation. Then they went to a Funtyme center for relaxation
and more team building. Many of the Peer Mentors knew each other because they were
college students at Michigan State University. A few students were from other colleges
or universities, and the Peer Mentor training served as a reunion. Many of these students

return annually, from participant to Peer Mentor, and have a long history with the camp.

Day 2 Saturday: Staff Training
The day was filled with training activities. The evening presented a practice of a
“relocation reenactment” exercise. This exercise was rather difficult and the Peer

Mentors expressed a great deal of nervousness. The idea behind the exercise is that

68

people are grouped into families and then in the dark of evening must find their way from
the beginning of a woodlot to the opening at the end. These people are “Natives” being
relocated and removed from their lands all while being chased by “White settlers.” Staff
who experienced the enactment before played the settlers. In order to save oneself or a
family member, one may need to break away from the family. For example, I was
holding my infant child [doll] and was with my husband [Peer Mentor]. He told me to
stay back as he deterred the settlers. My husband was killed. I was stunned at the
amount of emotion that all of the participants of this exercise experienced, including
myself.

We met later that evening with Tawa Sina, an American Indian psychologist who
ran a talking circle. Out of cultural respect, issues discussed in that circle cannot be
revealed. The reenactment and talking circle were to be repeated later in the week with
the youth participants. It was great having Tawa work with us. She is a member of the
MSU Native community, and having the support of community members demonstrated

the value the program.

Day 3 Sunday

The youth participants moved in, with tremendous excitement. During orientation
they learned the rules and regulations of the university and community standards of
MILP. A community member, John Pigeon, came in to teach the participants how to play
Native games. Stick ball was the first activity, but many of the girls refused to play. For
some their heath seemed to interfere. Many of the girls were extremely overweight and

just sat on the sidelines. Some were just being “prissy” and did not want to get sweaty or

69

dirty. I forgot how much the power of puberty has at this age. Later that evening,
committee [work group] topics were introduced to the students. These included
yearbook, talent show, and pow wow. Several of the youth were excited about these and
each Peer Mentor supervised a committee.
Charlotte commented regarding the first day the youth arrived:
It is amazing how different kids are than adults. I was once a kid and remember
feeling how they feel, but I didn’t know how to control it or over come it then. I
no longer fear what others may think of me, or that I must act a certain way or
dress a certain way to be “cool” or considered “good enough” to hang out with the

rest of the crowd. Although I saw all of this, I also saw many more leaders today
then I remember when I was at camp when I was younger.

Day 4 Monday

The morning opened at 7AM with a sunrise ceremony, and it never ceases to
amaze me how many students get out of bed at that hour to attend, especially since the
activity is not mandatory. Every year at camp an elder lives-in, and he gets up with the
youth and conducts the ceremony outside. The sunrise ceremony is a beautiful ceremony
that has been passed down from several generations. It is a way to empower one’s mind,
body, and spirit and greet the day. The elder often chooses a young male who is
knowledgeable about the culture to assist and possibly run the ceremony later in the
week.

Some girls from one of the reservations arrived late, and I volunteered to check
them in [they are known as the S-Town girls]. Rumor has it that they were “tough girls”
with rough attitudes and had some adjustment issues the previous summer. Ironically,
they were from about an hour away from where I grew up. We made fast friends and

ended up socializing most of the week.

70

Day 5 Tuescgy

The students appear to be much more attentive to activities that incorporate
Native culture then during lecture formatted workshops. They were in a writing
workshop in which they had to smell different scents and then write about the first thing
to come to their mind. There were many different responses and some very cute stories.
One boy even made up a rhyme about all the smells. One of their girls was too shy to
read hers, but wanted it to be heard so someone else read it for her. This was a nice
demonstration of community support. Native humor is everywhere. These kids are
exceptionally funny.

This evening was the relocation reenactment and the talking circle. Some of the
students took the experience very seriously and others did not. It was a little frustrating
because several of the students were clueless about the culture and a lot of time was spent
going over protocol and respect issues. The talking circle went so late into the evening

that students tended to zone out.

Day 6 Wednesday

The students had a full day. They went to the Fisheries and Wildlife Department.
As they moved around a great deal, they did not get too restless. They also attended a
forestry workshop where they were able to observe and measure trees. Some of the
students inquired about scholarship and career information to pursue a career in forestry.
Later in the day we had a talking circle with George Martin. When George spoke about
the Native ways of life, the students were very attentive, quiet and respectful.

Charlotte commented in her writings:

71

George had us go around the circle and give our name, Native if we had it, and
where we were from. I was amazed today at how many Natives did not have their
traditional names. I thought I was one of the few who never had a naming
ceremony when I was a child, but I was proven wrong today. George explained
the importance of finding your traditional name and the steps that you can take to
find it. Most of the kids were afraid to ask questions today. They were
embarrassed, which is understandable because several of them didn’t have
experience with ceremonies. So, I helped them out and I asked for them.
Today was also a talent show, tobacco project play [a play discouraging the use of
tobacco for non-traditional uses] and a pow wow. The talent show was very interesting
as it was infused with the American Idol theme. I was asked to play the American Idol
judge Paula Abdul; however, my named was changed to Paula-Paula. Again, it was a
very funny day; I forgot how humorous Indians are when you get them all together. I
really miss this type of environment.

The schedule was too packed for so many activities in one evening and, therefore,
things did not run as smoothly as planned. One of the student participants took on the
role of Master of Ceremonies at the pow wow and did a tremendous job. There were
many examples of students I least expected to be assuming leadership roles. It was rather
powerful. Several community members and passers-by came to the pow wow that was
on the river. It was a nice evening.

I spent a great deal of time with the S-Town girls this evening. They asked a lot
of questions about school. They have already done poorly in a couple of years of high
school and they did not have much ambition for attending school. A former Peer-Mentor
and S-Town girl and a participant in this study, Alisha, was from their reservation. I told
them how Alisha had graduated recently and was now working for their tribe. We called

Alisha from my cell phone and they all spoke with her. As a former Peer Mentor, Alisha

gave them words of advice about paying attention and taking advantage of the program.

72

It was great being able to connect them with someone from their tribe that they respected.
Alisha served as a role model to them even though she is now a professional in the
community. While she was not at the camp, she was only a phone call away. We all

laughed and took pictures at the pow wow. We vowed to communicate via email at the

end of camp.

Day 8 Thursday

This was the last full day for the students. Every morning began with the
opportunity for a sunrise ceremony and then a Peer Mentor led an ice breaker. This
morning, I attended the ice breaker, but I needed to leave to do a few things at my office.
I returned at dinner to find that several of the students were very upset with me and
questioned why I had left for so long. I tried to explain that I worked as well, but they
appeared betrayed that I may have felt something outside of this experience was more
important. From that point on, I rearranged my schedule to make sure that I was not
missing during the camp. I wonder now, however, had I not lived-in, what kind
connection and relationship I might have had with the kids this year. While I am
definitely a member of this MILP community, had I not lived in and only shown up for
activities, I think my experiences and research would be very different.

A faculty member gave a workshop today and the Peer Mentors came back
furious. They said that the staff member intimidated the kids and scared them away from
possibly going to college. They could not believe that in one moment the kids would
consider not going to school because an Indian scared them away.

One of the Peer Mentors indicated the following:

73

Robert told me he had to show them the seriousness of the situation [applying to
university], but I think he scared them away. The way I see it is most kids are
afraid or nervous to apply for college in the first place. Especially Native kids
coming from the background most of us come from, college seems far fetched as
it is, then you have someone like Robert scaring you from applying even more. I
think he did good on the seriousness of the situation, but I think he should also tell
them that it is highly possible for them to go to college and if they need help it is
there. We need to encourage our kids and show them that it is very possible to go
to college, not scare them away.

Day 9 Friday
Today was just a day of logistics, room checkouts and other closure activities.
Yearbook signing was the highlight on everyone’s list, and there were a lot of tears and
goodbyes.
A Peer Mentor indicated:
Not only were the kids open with each other, they were now really open with me
as well. They did not think of me only as a counselor, they thought of me as a
friend. It is sad to think that they are leaving today. When everyone finally gets
comfortable with each other and themselves they have to leave. I think that camp
should be a bit longer than a week. I know it is exhausting but I think the kids
would benefit a lot more if the camp were longer.
The Following Are My Final Thoughts of the Overall 2003 MILP Experience
One major conflict this camp experiences now that it did not in the early years is
that it shares the residence hall with six other Minority camps. On one level it is
frustrating because it seems as if the university has “ghettoized” its minority camps into
one location. Another problem that occurred with placing several different camps
together is that none of the programs in our hall had as much adult leadership and

involvement as the Michigan Indian Leadership Program. Further, none have student

participants as young as at the MILP. At the MILP an elder and the coordinator lives in,

74

as do all of the Peer Mentors. The other camps’ participants had much looser rules and
less community involvement. Most of the other camps’ attendees were predominantly
Black. Some of our mixed-blood MILP participants that were Indian and Black tended,
when possible, to join with members of the other camps rather than with MILP
participants. Eventually, several conflicts of varying degrees arose between the different
camps.

The diversity of the community provided both positive and negative issues for all
people involved. Peer Mentors struggled with issues of their own identity and wondered
how they could assist their students when they were not secure themselves. The use of
Native humor was so widespread through the MILP that one could not leave it without

feeling a tremendous sense of joy.

Findings and Themes

Native Leadership: A Measure of Balance and Empowerment

In Native culture, the expectation is that the community comes first - collective
need over individual needs. Traditional Indigenous models of leadership are often about
the commitment to nurturing a healthy community and enriching the cultural tradition of
one’s people (Cajete, 2000). During the MILP, teaching youth the responsibilities of
being Native was not something that could be taught in a week, but was developed over
time with the building of community and relationships. These relationships may have
started during one week of a summer, but they continued throughout the lives of the
students. Peer Mentors served as continuous points of contact for MILP participants at

pow wows, ceremonies, and cultural events, and also provided support via phone calls

75

and emails during the academic years. Further, MILP sought to expand the development
and leadership skills of the Peer Mentors, which served as a retention tool during their
college experience. Mentoring served as the foundation of Native leadership
development. College student Peer-Mentors mentored youth participants. Elders and
program coordinators mentor the college students as well as the youth. Out of the data
analysis emerged the MILP Leadership Development Model, which is explained in
Chapter Five.

The entire reasoning behind the development of the MILP was to develop future
Indigenous leaders. American Indian people recognize that Indigenous communities
need Native leaders rooted and grounded in their cultures (Johnson et al., 2003). Native
leadership was identified as being central to the MILP program since its inception (MILP
Proposal, 1997). The name of the program evolved from the Michigan Indian Youth
Retreat to the Michigan Indian Leadership Program, as Native leadership development
was at the forefront.

Mainstream leadership scholars define leadership in several ways. “Leadership is
an attempt at influencing the activities of followers through the communication process
and toward the attainment of some goal or goals” (Donelly, Ivancevich, & Gibson, 1985 ).
Leadership requires using power to influence the thoughts and actions of other people.
Zalenik ( 1992). While mainstream leadership skills can be developed through training
and other activities, the development of Native leaders is very different. American Indian
leaders were humble servants to the community. Individual American Indians did not
seek leadership or promote themselves for it. Rather, persons with strong traditional

values and persons who contributed to the community emerged as leaders. The

76

community recognized and sought leadership from persons perceived as having the
knowledge, wisdom, skills and experience to act as a leader for the tribe (Johnston,
1995). Indigenous leaders rise to leadership positions because of their service to their
community and people. To be of service to one’s people was a major goal of every adult
member of a tribe (Cajete, 2000).

In an interview with Eva Menefee she indicated:

When I think of a Native leader, when most people think of a Native
leader, they need to have a person they can attach to the idea of leader. In this day
and age, in Indian country in Michigan, I don’t see that. I don’t see anybody who
is that leader. That leader is someone who is willing to do things for others, for
nothing in return. Someone who can stand for a cause and not get anything back.
Or someone who can stand for a cause and get mud thrown at them. Some who
would say something and the people would listen and it would make an impact.
A leader will take a stance in the midst of disagreement but could still make you
sit back and say, ‘you know, maybe’ and rethink your position. This is what we
are missing; we just don’t have that right now. There are a lot of people who
think they are a leader, but they are not, because they are looking for what they
will get out of it. In the old days there were many, many leaders because they
weren’t always looking to get something out of that. That is what I tried to build
the camp on — that is Native leadership. The stuff going on now in our
community, the fighting, the jealousies — the “too many chiefs and not enough
Indians mentality.” That is what is going on and if we train our youth with that
mindset they become adults with that mindset and we lose yet another generation.

Menefee’s words remind us that teaching both participants and mentors the old
ways of Native people often is in direct conflict with the modern world. To this day, the
MILP struggles to maintain a balance and to hold to its mission. Implementing Native
leadership development provides challenges in a world in which Native people and
Native youth are increasingly lured away from their traditional value systems.

The MILP coordinator’s leadership style has not altered much over the past
fifteen years, although the program is in its fourth generation of leadership. This is in

part due to the fact that each successive MILP coordinator has had a long-term affiliation

77

with the program and was mentored for several years by the coordinator, thus allowing
for the original program values to be consistently instilled and followed. Eva Menefee
began the program as a grassroots effort in 1988. The leadership change process has
worked so that the coordinator acts as a mentor to Peer Mentors, and the Peer Mentors to
MILP participants.

Due to the culture and small size of the Native community within the state of
Michigan, there is a family-like atmosphere in the MILP program. As with any program
there are often financial and administrative challenges to overcome, and MILP is no
exception. Examination of historical documents confirmed that the initial development
of the camp was at best a short-term program designed to give students initial skills they
might take back to high school (Report to MSU Provost, 1999). No one in the initial
stages of MILP thought it would last for so many years and thus impact so many lives
(Menefee, 2003). However, a need for the program and determination of Native
professionals kept it running. Additionally, funding was and continues to be an
enormous barrier to MILP programming efforts.

During the first 10 years, volunteers utilized internal MSU and external grassroots
fundraising efforts to run the camp. Program coordinators organized the 1998 to 1998
camps out of their homes and offices and often used personal finances to meet unmet
financial costs. After several years of organizing the camps in this manner the facilitators
found themselves exhausted. One coordinator had to resign from running the camp
because a supervisor told the coordinator, “Your job is not running the program and you
can’t do it anymore.” After the tenth year, the founders decided it was time for them to

stop running the camp. I rallied MSU and convinced the university to commit to

78

continuing the program. I was the first person hired, hired on a part-time basis to run the
program, but at a rather limited salary, with no support staff or office space. The camp
would not have existed if it were not for the love, energy, commitment and drive of
Native professionals who believed American Indian youth should have more
opportunities to achieve in higher education without compromising their culture. It is
because of this demonstration of Indigenous leadership that the MILP exists today. After

an additional six years, MSU created a full-time staff position to run the program.

Community Building

One of the primary issues that emerged during the interviews conducted for this
study was the sense of community building that was fostered by involvement in the
MILP. MILP served as a foundational base for building cohorts of Native students and
professionals, weaving an intricate network of community throughout the state of
Michigan. MILP participants developed a strong sense of belonging within the Michigan
Native community and a more stable sense of individual cultural identity. The Michigan
Indian Leadership Program reinforced a sense of community and social responsibility
that goes along with being a Native person. The program embraced each participant and
Peer Mentor and sought to build upon their experiences as Native people.

Robin Menefee, a former coordinator, indicated, “Our program’s success is that
we got kids to think about what it meant to be an Indian and what the responsibilities of
being an Indian person were” (Menefee, 2003). MILP participants were provided both
the time and opportunity to reflect on the importance of social responsibility and

leadership and were given opportunities to enhance their level of self-reliance.

79

While working as an admissions officer at Michigan State University, Eva
Menefee became frustrated at the lack of American Indian students applying for and
being accepted to the university. She decided to do something about this problem. She
merely wanted to bring Native students to MSU’s campus. There were programs for
minority students at MSU, but Indian youth did not participate in these. What began as a
small idea to bring Native youth to campus evolved into what is now MILP. Menefee
describes the motivation behind developing the program:

The goal was to just get Indian students to visit a college campus and spend some
time there. That simple little thing - to get them exposure. Because most of the
students at that time never even thought—had never gone to a camp in a college
like MSU. There were lots of pre-college programs for minorities, but Indian kids
won’t go to those.

The early of days of MILP were simple. While the organization and its purpose evolved
over the next decade, the program itself has never lost its founding principles.
Eva Menefee described the level of social and community responsibility MILP

participants felt:

I think when you’re in the situation that we put the kids in about being
responsible for each other, it didn’t matter at the camp what level of academic life
you came from and it didn’t matter what socioeconomic level you came from or
how much Indian you were, [blood quantum] how dark you were or who your
family was, because at camp, everyone was the same. I think that played a role in
the people that participated, because just like in the Native community whether
you came from a family that had money or no money, whether you came from a
school where you were the brightest or you were in special ed[ucation],
everybody was on the same playing field and you take care of each other. The
expectations of your behavior, your responsibility, how you act in public were the
same for everybody. And that’s what made the difference, because in school
there is a clash, at home there is a clash but at MILP we worked very, very hard to
achieve that sense of community. That was probably one of the hardest things we
did, to find equal value in everyone who came and make each participant, mentor,
elder, workshop instructor and guest feel equal value and to teach them to carry it
with them and demonstrate it throughout their lives.

80

Menefee’s words demonstrated the effectiveness of the MILP’s attempts at building
leaders and community. Further illuminating the importance of social responsibility to
the Native cormnunity, Menefee indicated:
One of my more profound moments is when I really got after the kids. They were
causing quite a disturbance in the dorm and the University staff were getting
upset. I really got after the kids about what it meant for their responsibility as a
Native person and how every time they did something, people would judge them
not because they were a girl or a boy or because of their age, but they would get
locked at and the Indian part of them would get blamed. It was a kind of wake—up
call for them to say you know being not just an Indian, but being a human being, I
have to respect other people’s property and I have to that respect for myself and I
have to have that throughout my life.
Menefee stressed the common values that are important to Native people in order to
develop a program that sought to reinforce Indigenous values in a culture that draws our
youth away from their Native traditions. The community building aspect of the program
was built into the day-to-day activities of both the Peer Mentor training experience and
the MILP week long schedule which is located in Appendix G. The following subtheme

is a summary of observations that took place at the entire MILP program beginning with

the Peer Mentor training.

Perceptions of Identity

Participants reported that within the MILP, every activity, workshop and
experience was developed around the culture of Native people. Further, the MILP
attempted to meet its participants where they were in their own understanding being
Native. One MILP Peer-Mentor said, “I came into this program not knowing anything
about Native culture. I think some of the kids felt more comfortable with me because

they knew I knew as little as they did about our own culture.” The MILP attempts to

81

provide a safe haven for people to learn more about their culture. A Peer Mentor
indicated, “My favorite experience at MILP was dancing at the pow wow. I have always
wanted to dance in fancy regalia and the camp was a very comfortable and supportive
place where I felt confident enough to do so [for the first time].” Other participants who
were familiar with their culture had opportunities to teach and share with others. One
participant commented, “All these Indians are at camp from the city act real ghetto and
not too respectful, but during the talking circle I explained some of the teachings and they
seemed to be really interested.”

An entire dissertation could be written on the issues and definitions of Native
identity. This research and this theme did not set out to define Native identity, but to
report what MILP participants revealed as important and salient in their lives. Menefee
commented:

The problem isn’t Native identity, the problem is that people think that your

identity is based on what card you carry in your pocket. No, your identity is

based on what your family has taught you over the years and what you have gone
out to learn on your own over time. Your identity is not developed by what you
carry in your hip pocket. That is not your identity and some people have that
mixed up. Your identity is formed by the people you grew up with and the family
you are with.
Menefee expressed the struggle that is internal to the Native American community - the
ability or inability to recognize and support those Native people who may not have the
“credentials” to enroll in their tribe of affiliation.

Issues of identity were identified and described as complex within the Native
community. Menefee continued:

You learn identity because of the exposure that you have with culture around you.

And you could have somebody who is as white as white that grew up on a
reservation because they were transplanted from their grandmother, four times

82

removed and that’s where they lived and they could be way more Indian than
some urban full-blood.

Menefee’s view of identity is a more traditional view. It supports identifying people as
Native who live their lives and have their experiences as Native people.
There were differing levels of how participants discussed and felt about Native
identity. Curt, a Peer Mentor, shared his view of identity and how it changed over time:
I think it’s good the camp is diverse because that kind of thing opens your eyes.
It’s hard when you see brown people everyday in one little area and then you go
and you see a bunch of people claiming to be Indian, but they don’t look like it at
all. It’s weird because I never thought Daryl was Indian. Then I got to know him
and he was a really good person and then I didn’t care and that stuff just goes
away. You see it with the kids; they change their thoughts as the camp goes on.
Curt grew up on a small reservation in Canada, and his first exposure to non-
reservation, non-Oneida, non-full—blood Indians was at camp. Curt participated in the
camp for many years, first as a camper and later as a Peer Mentor. His view of Native

identity clearly changed over time.

A Peer Mentor relayed the following story to me during the 2003 summer camp

observations.

Yesterday I was talking to one of the campers who has got blonde hair and blue
eyes and she’s actually a full-blood, and her brothers and sisters are brown with
brown hair and she was actually crying. She was saying that because she is
blonde, she doesn’t want to participate in the culture. She was picked on all the
time. At least at camp we provide a safe environment. It doesn’t matter what
color you are. But I think about that and I know that happens to a lot of people
and it’s hard. I mean I’m light, too. It’s been hard, It’s hard too for me because
I’m educated, our own people think the reason that I did so well in education is
because I’m white. They also think that I’m white, because I’m educated.

This Peer Mentor struggled with her own identity as a lighter-skinned female getting her

education. She articulated differences that are experienced in many nuclear families,

83

where one family member is darker and, therefore, well accepted into the community and

another lighter family member is not.

Importance of Culture at MILP

Besides exposing Native American youth to higher education, the founders had as
a goal to incorporate Native culture into every component of the camp. Menefee stated:

Native kids might have gone to camps, but the focus wasn’t on academics. I
wanted our program to be fun, cultural and have an academic piece in place. The
whole point of this camp was that students would understand what it was to be a
Native person growing up in the world today. We did it with the mindset that if
you didn’t know about your heritage, your Native heritage, you would get the
opportunity to learn about it. And if you did know about your Native heritage,
you would be in a comfortable place. Being Indian is more than “being Indian,”
because it has got to be your way of life. It’s not something that you turn on and
off like a religious idea. If you’re Native, you’re Native and that’s how you need
to live. And if you’ve never been brought up that way, then you need to learn
about that because that is part of who you are.

It is evident that the MILP camp was founded on the values and culture of Indigenous
people. The camp participants were primarily members of the Michigan Tribes, the
Pottawatomie, Odawa, and Ojibwe known as the People of the Three Fires. However, the
camp attempted to maintain a more “Pan-Indian” atmosphere and encouraged activities
and traditions that most tribes practice. Magnuson, the program coordinator, described
the reasoning.
Native identity among the campers varies completely. You have some kids that
know that they are a little bit Indian, but they know nothing about their culture.
Then you have the kids that are from the res[ervation] and while they are around
Indians all the time they still do not know their culture. And then there are all
those in between, so there is quite a spectrum of identity. Upon leaving, [the
MILP camp] however, there is always a stronger Native identity for the kids who

aren’t exposed much to the culture. They always definitely feel that they are
Indian afterwards.

84

Magnuson addresses a common problem in modern Native America. Many Native youth
are being raised without being grounded in or exposed to their culture. To develop
Indigenous leaders, Native youth need to be able to walk in both their Indian and non-
Indian worlds. Vine Deloria (1994) stated, “People are not allowed to be Indians and
cannot become whites. They have been educated, as the old-timers would say, to think
with their heads instead of their hearts” (p. 243). The MILP provided opportunities for
those with little or no exposure to their culture to begin to understand it and the

opportunity for those that were culturally grounded to deepen it.

Mentoring
Complimenting community building and leadership development, the MILP

program stressed the importance of fostering mentoring relationships, which served as the
foundation for networking, community building and leadership development. The MILP
program was built around the premise that Native American college students would serve
as Peer-Mentors during the camp so that Native youth participants would see role models
attending college. Magnuson expressed her perspective of how the sense of a mentoring
community was established:

The students are exposed to each other’s family history, but they are also exposed
to their Peer-Mentor’s history. And throughout the week they spend so much
time with these Peer-Mentors and the peer mentors share so much with the
students, the students really respect the college students that are there. When the
college students share their family histories it opens up a lot of people’s minds.
And then there is always an elder that is involved with the program, who spends
most of the daily activities with the kids. And the elders are always accepting of
all the students there, whether they are blonde hair, blue eyed, or dark skinned.
So I think seeing the fact that everyone is accepted because they are Native,
sometimes opens the eyes of some of the students that might otherwise have been
a little discriminating of some of the other students. After that, they come back
year after year, attend pow wows, ceremonies and other activities, they go on to

85

become college students and Peer Mentors and they have a respected, comfortable
life-long place within the community.

Michaelina identified the safe environment that MILP provided so that the youth
participants could feel encouraged to embrace traditional Native values that are often
discouraged in this modern Indian and non-Indian world.

The MILP participants discussed with me their changes of attitudes and values
shifts as they became close to their mentors. The youth would often describe their Peer
Mentor as a big brother or sister. One MILP participant illuminated this in her journal

while at camp:

You know, yesterday I wanted to go home. We all are different in our own ways
at our own times and the last time I was here I didn’t understand that. And this
time I’ve learned that we have to give people chances to express who they are.

Last night well yesterday actually wasn’t such a great day for me and I just really

needed people to listen and hear me out so I was rude to Brenda and I think I even

upset Micky [program coordinator] a little but I was tired and rude and I just let
all my emotions go so when I say I’ve learned we have to give people chances to
express themselves and be themselves I can understand better when people are
upset cause now I’ve been there and done it. Just have to be nice and caring when
people are down and not feeling well is what I’ve really noticed here.

The sense of mentoring as a level of social responsibility and the idea of giving
back to the community were natural benefits of participation in MILP. Carla described,
“Being able to return to MILP as a Mentor the summer after my freshman year of college
and again after my sophomore year has taught me that I need to pass the same things I
learned from MILP onto the kids now.” Andrew said, “It’s not just going to a Pow Wow
or going to a feast it is living the life that you’ve been taught to live and being there for
the service of your own people.” Community and social responsibility was not created at

the MILP, as it is an intrinsic value within the Native American community; however, the

MILP provided a rich environment which supported this value.

86

Many of the students and the Peer Mentors referred to a sense of belonging within
the Native community that has lasted throughout their lives. Peer Mentors carried this
with them as they went to college. Since so many MILP participants attend Michigan
State University, there was usually a built-in cohort waiting for each new student.
Additionally, with the first program’s being in 1988, the first groups of MILP alumni are
now serving as professionals within the state of Michigan and beyond. This created a
growing professional network and a bond with people in the area of culture and
traditional participation. Menefee indicated:

MH.P provides a retention effort--from what I’ve seen and a little family system for
MSU students who are there. Even the campers that don’t go to MSU and go to
places like Ferris or up in Canada have camaraderie with each other. Everyone
always meets up at pow wows or ceremonies. Life-long friendships were built at
camp and MILPers are building social connections at all the colleges and universities
in Michigan. This is so important because when you go to a school, if there are no
other Indians there, you need to create some kind of network to help you be
successful. MHsP serves as that network, so if someone is alone at Ferris, they have
former MILPers as a support at say MSU.

Menefee articulated what she witnessed as outcomes of participation in the MILP.
Additionally, Peer Mentors articulated an enormous sense of responsibility in carrying
forth their mentoring experiences throughout the academic and personal lives of the
MILP participants. Charlotte expressed:

After working with these camps, it really made me wish that I had had the same
opportunities when I was a kid. MILP is a wonderful program for Native youth. I
never learned anything about my heritage as a Child, and I think introducing and
exposing the child to that (which they may or may not get at home) is a great
thing. At camp they meet other Native youth, who will very likely become long—
term friends. I heard numerous kids say that this was the best camp that they had
ever been too... I think that says a lot about this program, because these kids will
remember the program, and us and when they are 18 and 19 years old, the ideas
that had been instilled in them from camp will carry over into their own lives and
decisions regarding their future.

87

Charlotte articulated a sense of pride for her participation as an MILP Peer Mentor. Her
own sense of identity was strengthened. She indicated that she often felt displaced from
her culture since she left her reservation and that she missed out on opportunities to learn
more of her traditions. Through the MILP she was able to spend time with elders and in
turn share her experiences with the youth. To this day, she has emerged as a leader
within her own community.

MILP relationships have fostered life-long friendships, professional colleagues,
people to celebrate traditions and culture with and continue to serve as positive influences
throughout the participants’ lives. Andrew described, “MILP means the connections and
relationships that I can make with younger Natives to help them reach their goals in life.
I hope to give them insight to a successful and possible future in education and their
lives.” The synthesis of interviews illuminated the purpose and mission behind the

Michigan Indian Leadership Program.

Career Choice and Motivation

Participation in MILP assisted many of the youth participants and Peer Mentors in
making a decision to attend college as well as in choosing their careers. Several of the
students indicated their motivation for attending college was to have a better life. Each
student interviewed has faced adversity in the area of finances and culture while
obtaining their education. All but one of the interviewees indicated that MILP was the
first time they learned that attending college was a possibility. One of the 2003 MILP
youth participants wrote in his MILP journal:

Today was a beautiful day with no clouds and it seemed like every bird in the
world was singing. As I was weaving my basket, it all hit me at once. The

88

relaxing smells of the tulips, salvias, and roses were an experience never to be
forgotten. I’m glad that John Pigeon could come. As a basket maker, he is a very
honored man in the tribe that we both come from. The week continues to be some
of the best days of my life. I am also considering Michigan State more since
listening to the lectures.

Another 2003 MILP participant articulated her ideas of camp:
Today I had the pleasure of eating lunch [in the dorm]. Before which I had a
wonderful class on horticulture. Then, after lunch, I received a beautiful lecture

on park, recreation and tourism resources. Then the group went to harvest a tree
for a black ash basket. I didn’t know there were so many things I could do in a

college.

Charlotte, a Peer Mentor said, “I had such a good time working with the kids and
I felt like I was doing something that mattered. I want to feel the same sense of worth in
my future career that I felt working in this camp.” Carla, a Peer Mentor, described the
importance of MILP in her career decision-making process:

MILP was my first summer at a camp mixing school, culture and socializing, the

summer after my seventh grade year. It was then I leamed/felt that my “artistic”

touch may actually be able to become a career and be studied in college. Until I

attended MH.P, I thought of college as a glorified high school where teachers

weren’t about to care if someone passes or fails and everyone was required to

learn the things they didn’t want to do.
And another Peer Mentor indicated, “MILP motivated me to do well and be a good
example to those that are younger than me. I’ve also been interested in being a high
school teacher and MILP gave me some experience in dealing with kids that age.” Many

others indicated that MILP helped them, not only decide to go to college, but to also see

what majors may be of interest to them.

Navigating Culture and Higher Education
Some of the interviewees were very active members of the Native community.

Some were active in their own tribes and bands, studying medicines, working for their

89

tribe or being involved in tribal politics. Others were less involved with their tribes, but
more involved in the wider Native community. Some chose a more “pan-Indian”
involvement, but not necessarily because of a watered-down identity. These findings
validate Weaver’s (2001) assumptions regarding the multilayered nature of identity as
she asserts that some tribal members may more strongly identify with their clan
affiliation, some with the tribe and others with a broader Native identity.
For example, Alisha indicated:
I don’t really identify with my tribe too much. There are too many politics, too
much nonsense, you know. They’ve told me my whole life to go to school, I go
to school and come back and they won’t offer me a job because everybody is
afraid that I will end up taking their job just because I am more educated than
them. I never got hired. I mean it was like years—it was over a year after I left
here [college] for me to get a job with my tribe. And my boss is a white woman.
So I don’t identify with my tribe, my culture and way of life is with the Midewiin
people, our medicinal society — the way of life that is balanced emotionally and
spiritually. Not many people from my band are Midewiin people.
Alisha has expressed frustration and sadness over her tribe’s inability to be grounded in
its own traditions and culture as well as the psychologically damaging effects that tribal
politics played in her academic and career experiences.
Andrew’s experience with his tribe was slightly different. He offered this
experience:
I grew up within my own tribe and I help set up our youth council. I come back
every once and a while to see where it is at. Traditionally, I am pretty active too,
it is kind of hard being down here [away at school] to be traditional because there
is not a lot going down in this area. I am used to being at home where there is
something cultural constantly going on. I am not always comfortable attending
[Native] activities down here [at school] because of the way I was taught to do
things isn’t the way people do them around here.

Andrew’s family at home practiced the culture and traditions in ways that he is

comfortable with. However, he felt less a part of the cultural activities at school because

90

they are more Pan-Indian traditions supporting the diversity of the students at his
university.

Tanya, a mixed-blood student, has thrust herself into learning nearly every aspect
of her culture that she could. She studies the language, is a pow wow dancer, has jobs
within the Native community, dates mostly Native partners, and chooses Indigenous
studies in her academic curriculum. Yet, she describes her relationship to her tribe in the

following manner:

I identify strongly as a Native woman and of the Anishnabe people. All of my
jobs and my areas of study are in Indian studies. But I am not close to my tribe at
all. I am an enrolled member and they helped pay for my education until my
parents got divorced, then they took it away. But I was poorer after the divorce.
My tribe is kinda far away and they don’t know much about our culture. I just

don’t do much with them.

It seems to be a concern among a few interviewees in the Michigan area that their tribes
are not culturally grounded and they feel the need to go elsewhere to experience and learn
about the traditions.

Charlotte expressed her turmoil and shared her experiences when she lived near
her reservation. “I stayed away from my tribe and didn’t affiliate too much because a lot
of people up there were too much into negativity, drinking, partying, drugs, sex and I
wanted to stay away from it.” Many of the interviewees indicated that their involvement
in their tribe was more limited due to stressors, politics, and other issues, but their activity
in the wider Native community was rather extensive.

Several of the student participants interviewed expressed that they experienced
confusion as they left their home communities to obtain an education. Most of the

participants were first-generation college students. Four of the participants indicated one

parent has returned to school to receive further education since the student began

91

attending college. College is often a place in which students seek to explore their
identity. Often they feel torn between “two worlds”: the Indian and non-Indian. Alisha
described her distress:

When I came to school here it was for four years and I had this struggle about

what I would call myself. I thought if I actually go to college and start working as

a professional that I would have to stop being Indian. That’s how I felt and I can’t

keep going to pow wows and ceremonies. I can’t go home and live on the

res[ervation] and live around my people if I am going to school and getting an
education. I didn’t want to be a professional and have a career and a nice house;
because when I would go home pe0ple would treat me like crap because they
thought I was stuck up because I went to college. Then at school it’s the opposite

treatment. I get ‘Oh, she can’t be professional, she’s Indian.’ So I felt stuck and I

kept telling myself, I either have to be Indian and go home and be poor and

continue this cycle that I was raised in or I had to be, you know, White.
Alisha’s experience is not uncommon, especially for first generation college students.
Many of the students felt they could not be Indian and be professional. However, the
MILP exposed them to Native American professionals that allowed them to break down
these mental barriers to achievement.

Several issues arose when interviewing students about academic and cultural
expectations. One of the assumptions often made is that students who are more
acculturated to mainstream culture will have a easier time in higher education versus
those that are more traditional in their value system (Brayboy, 1999). The findings
illuminated in this study do not support this ideology. There are additional studies that
indicate that students who are more traditionally grounded in their culture do better in the
classroom (Bowker, 1993; Deyhle, 1992, 1995; Deyhle & Margonis, 1995; Swisher &
Deyhle, 1997). The students all identified as American Indian and yet their daily

experiences as Native people were very different. Moreover, their experiences

navigating academic and culture expectations varied as well.

92

The students who appeared to have the most difficulty navigating their academic
and cultural experiences were those of multiple ancestries who identified primarily with
their Native heritage. Five of the eight students interviewed were of mixed heritage.

Four reported lower grade point averages and more missed class time to attend Native
social and cultural events. These mixed-blood students were challenged to keep their
Native identity intact by participating in as many cultural events as possible: being pow
wow dancers, learning their native language in addition to their other academics, dating
only Native partners, pursuing majors that focused on Native studies, and maintaining
jobs in the Native community or for Native organizations.

Students who were full-blood or raised more to be culturally grounded did not
feel the pressure to attend every Native function or cultural activity and reported grade
point averages well above the mixed-blood students. Likewise, they also did not feel that
others in the community challenged their identity when they were not present at these
events. For example, Andrew, a full-blood student, indicated:

I try to make it to whatever stuff I can, but I don’t have to be at a feast to practice

my culture, I don’t have to be at a ghost supper to practice my cultural way of life.

Because I grew up knowing that the way of life we have is constantly with us; it is

not at one spot here or one spot there or whenever the pipe carrier is there — you

always carry it with you and I put down my tobacco and say my prayers on my
own time and I don’t have to be at the certain spots to practice my culture.
Andrew also suggested:

I think some of the students who have the harder time [navigating academics with

culture] are the ones who want to be at pow wows every weekend and they may

even be a pow wow dancer. For them it satisfies a spiritual need going to a pow
wow, but the being spiritual in Ojibway ways here is not just going to a pow wow,
it is living a daily life as an Ojibway person.

Tanya, a mixed-blood student, indicated that she chose taking lower grades to attend

cultural activities. “For ceremonies, professors are somewhat understanding [for missing

93

classes] but for Pow Wows —- I always go to Gathering of Nations [in Arizona] and
Schemetizan [in Connecticut]; however, I didn’t go last year because I have suffered
from it academically.”

Charlotte, another mixed-blood student, indicated

There are a lot of things I would like to learn, but it is a long process. You have
to go up and talk to elders, do all that stuff. And all of my family is north of
Michigan. Being here, I have learned a lot from the other Native students and
from being in MILP. It’s hard for me to learn because I was raised in the city, so
just being here, I gain information from everybody else. Even though it is from
different tribes, I have gained a generalization of the traditions and things like
that. And when I’m able I go up north for our big feasts and other stuff.

Another concern that was identified during the interviews was the challenge that
Native students faced in the classroom itself. Several students expressed concern over
their experience in the classroom. Meredith described her experience:
I think I should have gone to a tribal college, because there would have been more
people there that think the same way that I did. A lot of times things were a
struggle. I got mad often about things professors taught in class. For example, in
one class we were talking about when Christopher Columbus came over and the
professor asked a class of over 100 people who the class thought were more
civilized — the Native Americans or Christopher and the people he brought with
him. I thought he was joking [when he asked this question] because of what the
people on his ships did to the Natives, but the class took it seriously and started a
discussion about Natives being less civilized. I could not believe it, I got so
emotional that I couldn’t even bring up the subject [to the professor]. I dropped
the class promptly after.
Identity and culture was, by far, the largest, most critical theme that materialized out of
the interviews, observations and other data collections. While this theme is strong
enough to stand on its own, it is also imbedded in several of the other themes that will be
discussed. Within the overall topic of culture and identity arose the sub-themes of the

importance of culture, diversity within the Native American community, definitions of

being Native American, bi-cultural challenges and cultural conflict.

94

Academics

MILP’s focus was to expose Native American students to higher education, with
the desire to increase college enrollment for Indian students. The interviewees articulated
various support systems and barriers that influenced them throughout their academic
years. These influences are the subthemes which included multiple academic
interventions, financial support, the role of faculty and staff, social support,

organizations, the role of family, and resiliency to drugs and alcohol.

Multiple Academic Support Services

Several of the interviewees identified as a strong contributor to their persistence
multiple academic support programs like the MILP, which emerged at varying stages
throughout their academic career. For example, one student indicated that the MILP was
responsible for getting her into school, and another office on her campus provided free
tutoring which assisted her academically, and yet another program designed for graduate
school preparation, assisted her in choosing to pursue a Ph.D. and in the graduate school
application process. Throughout the interviews, those interviewees who had attended or
were attending MSU began mentioning the same offices and programs and gave credit to
their academic persistence to these programs.

On the basis of the interviews, it appears that multiple academic support programs
throughout the life cycle of a student increased her/his ability to succeed academically

(Astin, 1984). Andrew articulated, “I came to MSU as a CAAPl student. The free

 

l The CAAP program is the College Achievement Admissions Program and is a supportive services
program for minority, first-generation, and low-income students. It provides academic advising. free
tutorial services and a multitude of other academic support services programs.

95

tutoring along and academic advising helped me a great deal. Then I moved into my
major and began working with the multicultural programs office. Those two offices were
huge support networks.” Another student commented on the importance of the Charles
Drew Minority Science Program: “I wouldn’t have lasted my freshman year if it weren’t
for that program. MSU was a big change coming from a little, tiny school. Most of my
life my class size was like 15 kids per grade.” These academic support interventions
served as support systems to students and to each other as organizations committed to
students’ success. Each program built on the strengths of students in different areas, but

culminated in the goal of promoting student academic performance.

Financial Support

The interviewees referred to financial assistance as a key factor in providing a
support system while in college. Some students received the Michigan Indian Tuition
Waiver as well as stipends from their tribes. The students who received tribal support
money had a perspective of higher education being about life-long learning rather than
that of just getting a degree. Several of the interviewees indicated they would always
take classes to continue skills or just for fun. Students without tribal financial support did
not have this perspective. Curt expressed, “If the tribe wasn’t so supportive [financially],
I would have never gone to college.” This student received financial support in the form
of payment of the college application fee, full tuition, a book stipend and a living stipend.
All of the students who are considering or pursuing graduate education were receiving

tribal support. While several students did receive support in the form of a tuition waiver,

96

the only students considering or pursuing graduate education were those who were also
receiving financial support directly from their tribe.

While financial assistance was critical to the support systems for Native students,
a common barrier was lack of adequate financial support. While many students reported
they received a tuition waiver and/or tribal support, American Indians have been one of
the poorest segments in the nation (Snipp, 1992). Nearly all of the students described
various aspects of financial stress. All interviewees worked one or more jobs while
attending school, and some provided financial assistance to their families in addition to

themselves.

The Role of Native Faculty/Staff Support and Others as Mentors
Nearly all of the interviewees articulated the sense of importance that the Native
American faculty and staff at their institution played. Many of the faculty and staff went
above and beyond their roles as faculty and administrators in seeing that students’ various
needs were met. Menefee reflected on her time as a MILP coordinator and a former
MSU staff member:
Hell, I had Indian students living in my house for many, many years. I think
about how much money I have given Native students. How many meals I have
fed them. How many nights they have slept on my couch or in the bed in the
other room or whatever. What other crazy person would have done that, but
that’s what Native people do. We take care of each other.
Tanya indicated, “If I wouldn’t have had such professional Native role models I wouldn’t
have gone as far as I have now.” Charlotte said, “Michaelina is a great support. She

offered me a job even though I don’t have work study and I am really struggling

financially.”

97

Non-Native faculty were also described as very important, specifically faculty in
the courses in the students’ major fields. Certain faculty were described as standing out
by offering to serve as mentors, following up with students via email and participating in
the students’ cultural campus activities. While these faculty/staff were non-Indian, they
often were very recognizable by members of the Native community and well known for
the support they offered Native students.

While Native and non-Native faculty were described as being key in many
student’s academic success, Native faculty and staff were also described as a barrier to
that success. Several of the interviewees attended the same academic institution. This
institution’s Native faculty and staff experienced an enormous political rift that
reverberated in the interviews and had a significant impact in several ways. The rift grew
out of “card-carrying” Native faculty choosing not to officially recognize or allow into
the American Indian faculty/staff association those Native faculty/staff who were not at
least a quarter blood quantum and from a federally recognized tribe. One mixed-blood
student articulated:

There were so many Native faculty that were helpful and there were many that

weren’t. And it was the card—carrying people that were not as helpful. The ones

who think they are righteous and better than everybody else. Unless you’re

darker then them, they aren’t as helpful to you. They help the darker students

more. Some of the faculty/staff, the Natives [Name, Name] keep things difficult.
This student and others indicated they felt slighted by the “card carrying” Native faculty
and that their status as non-full-bloods made them feel “less than.”

Yet another student indicated:

There were some Native faculty -- one who helped me a lot and one who really

hindered things. I worked for [Name] and she talked badly about me to other

students. She was so negative and I worked well with Professor [Name] and he
really supported me, but she would say things bad about him and say he wasn’t

98

really Indian and was here fraudulently, but he helped me get through school
more than she did.

The president of the Native student association at this college indicated he was
distressed because his organization had two Native faculty advisors - one tribally
recognized and one not. He indicated that he felt the tribally enrolled advisor and other
faculty/staff were coercing him to oust the non—tribally enrolled advisor. He was
extremely distressed and uncomfortable about this situation. He articulated:

The faculty problem has really affected how I work with our student organization.

I felt like I was always being caught between two things - trying to keep the

student organization running without any of those conflicts because the

organization didn’t need that and still doesn’t need it. The two faculty staff
organizations send representatives to our meetings and you can see the
uncomfortableness there at the meeting and that is just something that has to be
dealt with, but it is going to take a while to sort out.

Social Support

Several of the interviewees indicated that their social support networks were
extremely important. There were several differences in how students established their
support networks. Mixed-blood students who identified more with their non-Indian
heritage established social networks that were mostly non-Native and appeared to be
satisfied with their support systems. Some mixed-blood students who identified more
with their Native culture struggled to find a niche and a balance. The students who were
mixed-blood but who identified more their non-Indian culture had a variety of social
support networks including Native and non-Native organizations, friends, and

professional associations. While these students chose social networks that were a mix of

Native and non-Native, they reported that sometimes it was challenging for them to break

99

into certain areas of the Native community. Andrew, a Native campus student leader
addressed this issue.

It is really hard to be a leader of the Native student organization. The
community is so closed itself and it is kind of hard for outside students to get in,
but being the leader helped me see both sides. There are students that are bi-racial
that haven’t lived a Native American life, but are trying to learn. Because when
you come to college, you are learning who you are and you are trying to find out
who you are as a person. And for them, it is hard to get accepted into the
organization, and often the community, because we have so many of our own
things that we grew up with and we hold those close to us. But you got to
understand both sides.

Mixed-blood students who identified mostly with their Native culture had social
networks that were almost exclusively Native. For example, all social organizations,
professional associations, dating partners and friendships consisted of only Native people
with very few exceptions. A mixed-blood female student indicated that most of her
friendships were made from the various Native student organizations on campus and that
she had little reason to look elsewhere. One student indicated, “The students that choose
academics over cultural activities — those students were not usually my friends. Those
were the students who usually were not involved in the Native student association, those
students don’t make time for cultural stuff — they really don’t identify with Natives.” By
contrast, full-blood students or students grounded in their culture reported a mix of

friendships, dating partners, social relations and professional associations both within and

outside of the Native community.
Organizations

Various organizations played significant roles in the retention and support of

Native students. For most students, regardless of the college, the Native student

100

organization served as the initial catalyst for introducing students to friends and cultural
activities. Other students referred to the importance of having Native lounges and student
organizations. Cultural based organizations or culture rooms provided space for Native
students to meet, socialize and network. Likewise, national organizations, one in
particular, seemed to play a large and significant role for nearly all students interviewed.
The American Indian Science and Engineering Society (AISES) was reported to serve as
an enormous support system for several reasons. First, the national organization has
university chapters, one of which is at MSU. Additionally, the AISES, while primarily
for science and engineering majors, is supportive of all Native students, high school
through college, in any career field. The campus chapters, unlike the Native student
organizations, often serve to promote the academic and professional development of
students. One student indicated:
Once I went to an AISES conference and I went to a session. This guy was
speaking and he was Native. He spoke his language and he was the only tribal
member that could do all of this tribe’s traditional crafts. He was a professor at
the University of Washington. And I was just sitting in this one-hour session
thinking. . .I can do it. I can make a good life for myself and still be Indian
because he’s doing it.
Another said, “Wholly, I couldn’t believe it. I walked into the career fair and saw all

these Indians in suits. I never saw Indians in suits. I never saw professional Indians

before.”

Role of Family in Areas of Support and Barriers
While much of the literature indicates the importance of family support as a
contributor to Native students’ academic success (Falk & Aitken, 1984; Pavel 1999), all

of the students interviewed indicated that their families and home communities were not

101

the main source of support. Most of the students interviewed indicated that their fathers
were not present and had left the family picture while they were quite young. Students
interviewed describe the tenuous relationships that existed with family or community
members as they received their education. Alisha explained:

When you get older, you either started having babies before you were ready to

have babies and you would just work at the casino as a dealer instead of going to

school. That is not what I wanted for me. But when I would come home from
school I found out that the Indians who were friends with me while growing up,
all of a sudden decided that I was a snob or I was stuck up because I came to
school.

As students worked toward their degree, they struggled with the attitudes of
friends and family at home. Students related stories of challenges because school
commitments compelled them to miss obligations or events at home. When students
returned home their friends and family would view the student as arrogant or snobby.
Several students interviewed indicated that people at home viewed them as “becoming
white” from their attendance at school.

Other challenges with the home community were revealed in the interviews.
Charlotte expressed her desire to work for her tribe and the difficulty she may have
because of tribal politics and infighting. “I was planning on getting my degree and
working for my tribal government, but I don’t know if I could work for them. They just
act completely stupid. I don’t understand why they function the way they do.”

Most of the students were the first in their families to attend college and felt the
pressure and responsibility to succeed in this endeavor. DeGagne’ (2002) refers to the
“Icon of Achievement” in which the students came to represent the first generation of

university graduates, the first to graduate from the community or the first among their

relations to achieve post-secondary success. While these students served as “Icons” and

102

were often boasted about to other family and community members this also caused
significant frustration for some students as it set them apart from the very community
they at one time felt close to. Alisha shared:

My dad was always harping about when I was going to graduate and it frustrated
me because he never even went to school. It bothered me because he should have said,
‘How’s school going or I’m glad you’re there,’ but the thing is he never said that stuff to
me, but he has told everyone else. He would never say to me, “I’m proud of you.”

Charlotte, as well, identified her discontentment:

I know every single girl that I grew up with in my tribe; every single one of them

had a child. And it scares me now because I go up there and I can’t relate to

them. They are so negative and all they do is degrade everybody else and I just

hated being around them. It’s hard because they’re people I grew up with and I

was around them every day, [now] they are just completely different people.
Charlotte and Alisha both expressed the frustration they experienced after attending
university. Alisha indicated that her immediate family did not serve as a great support
system because the act of getting educated drew her away from the family and
community. Charlotte conveyed her dismay with the changes she witnessed in her peer
group. While Charlotte recognized that the peer-group changed, she did not identify her
own personal growth and shifting perceptions as a possibility for recognizing the
differences in her peer-group relationships.

Much of the students’ support came from family, but often not just the case of the
nuclear family. The interviewees’ descriptions of extended kinship as family
contributions were very important. Krouse (1999) identifies the importance of kinship
ties in Indian Country. Kinship can be extended through cultural practices and reinforce
existing or new relationships. The interviewees indicated varying levels of kinship. For

example, several students became close to an American Indian faculty or staff member at

their college. This staff member became a “surrogate” parent for the student and the

103

“kinship” attachment remained even after the student graduated. Curt relayed the most

poignant story of the importance of kinship and described how he was raised after his

mother’s passing in his youth.
I grew up alone with just my grandmother, [on the reservation] but I feel like I’ve
been raised by hundreds of people that I owe so much credit to. I was raised by
Eva and Marsha during the summers and I was raised by Genevieve and then I
was kind of raised by my neighbor because I would go over there and he would
keep me around if I helped out and I felt like part of the family when I did that.
He helped raise me and then a couple of people from school because I had like a
rough childhood; my mother was dead so I had some issues there. I was very
sensitive and stuff like that. I feel like a lot of people helped me out and made me
who I am.

Curt’s story is remarkable and is an illustrative example of the famous African tribal

proverb, “It takes a village to raise a child.” MILP provided the village and each and

every person that walked through the program maintained a level of responsibility to

raise and support each other.

Resiliency to Drugs and Alcohol

Alcohol abuse and related health problems are a leading killer of American
Indians on reservations as well as in cities (Snipp, 1989). Rick Thomas, a substance
abuse counselor for the Santee Sioux Tribe of Nebraska was quoted in Indian Country
Today, “By the time a child on the reservation reaches the age of 9, he or she has buried
three to five people close to them.” (Bad Wound, 2000). Many of these deaths are
alcohol related. Statistics given in Chapter Two reviewed the devastating effects of
substance abuse in Indian Country.

In 1997, I coordinated the MILP program during a very hot summer. We had a

dance scheduled and I had asked the cafeteria to provide frozen, fruity drinks as

104

refreshments. When the dance was started, I was called away to a health crisis on the top
floor. When I returned, the cafeteria employees had set up a “bar” with non-alcoholic,
frozen fruity drinks. The MILP youth participants were drinking them and within a short
amount of time were stumbling and appearing “drunk.” Rumors spread through the
youth that there was “real” alcohol and they were “high” and “drunk.” It was an
overwhelming example of the “power” of alcohol and its psychological effects on a
people permeated with substance abuse problems. It was also a teachable moment for the
cafeteria employees to not bring a “bar” atmosphere to children.

The interviewees - mixed-blood, full-blood, reservation and non-reservation - all
told tales of substance abuse and its effects on their lives while students. Nearly all of the
students indicated that alcoholism had impacted them directly with at least one parent
and/or close relative having a drug or alcohol problem. Two of the students identified
their own problems with drugs and alcohol. Charlotte also shared that she struggled with
her sister’s drug and alcohol abuse. Charlotte expressed her difficulty when she returned
to her reservation after completing some college:

My transition back [to the reservation] was really hard because these people that I

grew up with my whole life were not the same at all. My older sister and I used to

hang out all the time and be the best of friends. And with that, up North

[reference to location of reservation] changed her a lot. She really got involved in

drugs and alcohol when she was up there and I didn’t and I was still friends with

her and stuff. She got back into the same crowd with everyone doing drugs and
alcohol. I still hung around her and her friends, but I was the only one into
basketball and sports and they were all cheerleaders, so I didn’t want to hang
around with them because they were constantly practicing a cheer and I wanted to
beat them up because it was irritating. So, I ended up smoking weed for a couple
of months. I was fourteen. By the time I turned fifteen, I stopped.

Curt had significant problems with drinking when he first started college. Curt

lived on his reservation and commuted to his local college. However, when he was

105

arrested and jailed for drunk driving, he was forced to drop out and has been unable to
return. Curt shares this tragic story.

I got in a car accident, I got arrested and I got my car impounded for 45-days
and then after that got arrested again [for drunk driving]. I went to jail. Then I got
arrested again after I got out of jail [for drunk and disorderly behavior]. Then I
quit drinking for a whole month, because when I was in jail, it was just on the
weekends. It really wasn’t that bad, but I quit drinking on the weekends. So I
wasn’t working, so all I would do is I’d change my drinking from on the
weekends to during the week, so I would get drunk during the week. And then I
would be going to friends and stuff like that. Then, I got arrested again. That was
like that last time. So when I got the car impounded for like 45-days, I felt like a
lot of the stuff was happening because of alcohol. So I said well, I think I’m going
to quit for a month. And I was using medicine my grandmother gave me
[traditional Native medicine]. So I quit for a month and I told my parents that I
quit and they were really happy. And after the month, I started drinking again,
but it wasn’t like—it was never like before. I would drink like occasionally
because then-now I’m hardly—I’m on the res[ervation]. So I kind of stopped
drinking except when at my cousin Phil’s. He used to live at home. Then I just
quit drinking because I’m not getting nothing out of it. I’m pretty much throwing
money out the window and I’m not getting anything accomplished. I don’t really
need to drink. So I quit. I have quit ever since then.

Curt and Charlotte’s struggle with substance abuse issues is not unique to American
Indian students, and campus support service programs in this area is lacking for
Indigenous students. None of the students indicated that they had support in the area of
substance abuse from their college or university. All of the students interviewed dealt
with the substance abuse issues of other Native student, often their friends that attended

their university. Several of these students dropped out of school.

Summary
Many of these findings are supported by the current literature. Tinto (1975)
indicates that of college social systems, mostly peer-group associations, appear to be

most directly related to individual integration and faculty interactions and extracurricular

106

activities are of secondary importance in developing the student’s commitment to the
institution. The design of the Michigan Indian Leadership Program was to provide peer-
group support and demonstrate the ability for students to integrate culture and academics
without compromising either. The preceding themes demonstrate the importance of
MILP for advancing American Indians students into higher education and elucidate the
importance of Indigenous people developing programs in collaboration with colleges and
universities. In the final chapter, the themes will be interpreted and implications

discussed.

107

CHAPTER SIX

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction

The study had two primary purposes. The first purpose was to gain an
understanding of the MILP’s history, mission, and evolution. Second, the study sought
information that would lead to a greater understanding of Native American students’
experiences and the contribution of pre—college, cultural and academic intervention
programs. Using a qualitative research design with various data collection methods, this
study identified a pre-college, American Indian cultural enrichment, summer, youth
program and examined several aspects of the program to determine its implications in the
lives of those Native youth that participated. This investigation included interviewing
past participants of MILP who attended between 1998-2003 and were either college
attendees or graduates of post-secondary education.

The findings of this study clearly emphasize the importance of the Michigan
Indian Leadership Program in the lives of the youth participants and the Peer Mentors.
The research questions raised at the commencement of this study provided the framework
for organizing a meaningful discussion of the various findings which emerged from my
data collection. The primary focus of analysis was to develop and understanding of the
significance participants make around their concept of their Native identity and how they
navigate cultural and academic expectations. The following questions directed my

analysis:

108

What were the outcomes and experiences of youth that participated in the
Michigan Indian Leadership Program?

How do American Indian college students who participated in MILP navigate
cultural and academic expectations?

In the following section, I will discuss the findings of the study around the questions that
directed my inquiry.

The findings elucidate that MILP was of great and important value in providing
opportunities for Native students to go onto higher education. Both past and current
student participants confirmed the importance of MILP in exposing the students to their
culture as well as to various academic opportunities available. Findings from the
American Indian students’ experiences in higher education illuminated the importance of
culture in the lives of the students. MILP served as a tool to bridge the gap between
academics and culture allowing for students to recognize the ability to walk successfully
in both the Indian and academic worlds.

Many of the interviewees indicated that MILP served as a catalyst and motivating
factor in their career choices. MILP not only provided exposure to higher education but
also attempted to demonstrate the versatility of career options available to Indian people.
All of the students interviewed indicated that MILP was a great contributor in allowing
the student to identify that attending college was indeed a possibility. In addition, nearly
all of the students interviewed indicated that it was multiple academic support programs
at various stages throughout the academic career that served in the retention of the
student. Programs and services mentioned were tutorial services, mentoring programs,
professional associations, cultural organizations, academic advising services, graduate

student preparation programs, among several others.

109

It was reported by the current and past Peer Mentors that MILP served as a
retention tool throughout their higher education experience. MILP Peer Mentors felt
supported throughout the academic year by other Peer Mentors that were also college
students and former Peer Mentors that served as their role models and mentors. Those
that returned in the summers expanded their leadership development opportunities and
indicated that they became more confident in several areas including cultural
competence, public speaking, listening, insight into career choice as well as academic
skill building. Peer Mentors also indicated that they kept in touch with faculty, staff or
community members that served as workshop instructors or facilitators at the MILP.
These relationships included mentoring, advocacy, and extended kinship roles that served
to assist the students with managing any barrier to educational resilience.

All of the interviewees identified as American Indian, but had different
experiences navigating culture and academics and their path depended upon the status
each person had within the Native community. The findings identify several differences
between mixed-blood and full-blood [or culturally grounded students] in their ability to
balance cultural and academic expectations. Issues of biculturalism were challenging for
the entire American Indian community to manage on a college campus and the mixed—
blood students revealed their struggles with it as well. All of the students interviewed
would be described as “at risk” yet all demonstrated resilience pursuing higher education.

The interviewees indicated several challenges in navigating academic and cultural
expectations. Many of the interviewees indicated that their social support networks were
as important as academic support systems. The largest area of implication is the way in

which full-blood and mixed-blood students in this study manifested their experiences of

110

higher education. This was not intended to be a study of the diversity within the
American Indian community, but the variation in the students’ educational experiences as
viewed from their Indigenous status is salient.

Full-blood students or students who were grounded in their culture did not feel
that their identity was threatened if they missed a “Native” event, or ceremony and
therefore were able to choose academics over cultural activities when necessary. They
also viewed missing these events as a temporary delay in their ability to participate in
their culture. This is not to say they did not want to go home and participate or felt sad
when they could not, merely, they did not feel their sense of “being Indian” was
challenged if they did not attend. In contrast, while these students felt their Native
identity was intact on an individual level, several reported conflicts with members of the
family or home community. Students indicated that they were often considered by
people within the home community as thinking themselves “too good” to participate in
Indian activities. At the community level they struggled with being both “professional”
and Indian. Most negotiated this aspect as they were exposed to educated or professional
Native role models. Contrary to mixed-blood students, full-bloods felt more free to seek
support systems and friendships from a myriad of people and organizations including
Indian and non-Indian.

In this study, the experience of mixed-blood students manifested in different
ways. Mixed-blood students who identified more with their non-Indian heritage had
challenges different from mixed-blood students who identified more with their Native

heritage. Both had difficulty in balancing the academic with the cultural expectations.

111

Mixed-blood students identifying more with non-Indian heritage faced challenges
of being welcomed into the wider university Native community. While they had their
MILP experience as a foundation, they did find it challenging to maintain Indigenous
connections outside of their participation within the program. These students revealed
that they could not find a “place” within the Indian community and they indicated that
they felt like “outsiders” if they tried to participate or find support from within certain
factions of the Native community. They often made attempts to become members of
Native student associations, attend pow wows or other events but found their lack of
cultural knowledge and connection intimidating. Since these students had less
connection to their tribal community, they found social and academic support systems
from non-Indians. This supports Weaver’s (2001) assertion that those who identify as
American Indian without community sanction have difficulty being accepted. Those who
were mixed with Caucasian indicated that they sometimes felt more accepted and more
“Native” around non-Indians. Those mixed with other races felt pressure to identify with
the racial group to which they physically resembled and often sought support systems
from that culture. These students continued to return to MILP as Peer-Mentors during
their college life as this remained the one place they were embraced as Native.

Some mixed-blood students indicated they felt they might lose their place in the
Native community or be forgotten if they did not always maintain a committed presence.
Therefore, many mixed-blood students who identified more with their Indian heritage felt
a need to participate in as many Native activities as possible, often at the expense of their
academics. Mixed-blood students who identified more with their Native heritage often

missed class to attend cultural activities — even those that were just social. These students

112

felt that if they “missed” an event they might be viewed as non-committed. Nearly all of
these students interviewed indicated they sought support systems from entirely Native
organizations and people. These students went out of their way to have little or no
affiliation with non-Indian entities.

On an individual level these students felt their sense of identity challenged if they
were not present at pow wows and ceremonies, dating Indian partners, leading Native
student organizations, pursuing Indigenous studies and being seen at local Native events.
On a community level, similar to full-blood students, mixed-blood students were more at
risk of alienation by the tribal community or Indian peers for being “too good” if they
could not be present at tribal/Native events because of academic responsibilities. It was
reported that some Native community members viewed the mixed-blood’s ability to get
an education because they were “whiter” and could be successful in the educational
environment.

Regardless of blood-quantum status, there was a strong importance placed on
being visible in the community. Native students often talked about the mixed-blood
students who identified more with their non-Indian heritage as “being too white” or “not
being Indian enough” which further perpetuated their alienation from participation in the
university Native community. For Indian people removed from the social interaction of a
reservation, other institutions become important in cultural expression. In urban Indian
communities these are often bars, pow wows, Indian Centers and churches (Weibel-
Orlando, 1991). For Native students these are pow wows, campus Native student
associations, ceremonies, or serving as Peer-Mentors for programs like MILP. Being

“seen” in these places assisted students in their cultural and social interactions.

113

In reviewing the findings it is clear that a majority of the students identified
several support systems and barriers in their pursuit of higher education. Financial
support proved to be of utmost importance to all students interviewed. Most indicated
that they would not have attended college if they had not received financial support from
their tribe or from the Michigan Indian Tuition Waiver. Additionally, those students
receiving tribal support money had more of a life-long perspective of learning then those
students without tribal funding. Only those students receiving tribal financial support
indicated they were interested in pursuing graduate education. A lack of financial
support was a strong barrier for students. Most students interviewed took longer than
four years to complete their degree. Several took five to six years and others seven or
more. Many “stopped-out” for a semester or more to earn additional funding and several
contributed financially to family members on a consistent basis.

Interviewees indicated that faculty and staff were instrumental in their support
and retention. It was found that both Indian and non-Indian faculty provided additional
support services above the requirements of their positions within the university or college
systems. Non-Indian faculty and staff were often recognized within the Native
community as supporters of Indian students and maintained a respected reputation.
Native faculty were the backbone of several students’ ability to stay in school and stay
successful. Native faculty and staff often served as a surrogate family to the students
who were away from home.

However, Native faculty and staff were also recognized to be a barrier to several
of the students’ academic success. Several students indicated that one or more persons in

their academic institution had psychologically or emotionally hurt them by participating

1.14

in gossip or other deteriorating and negative activities that embarrassed or distressed the
student. Other students indicated that they often were caught in the political drama that
played out within the university American Indian community. Several students indicated
that the dysfunction from their own families seemed to follow them within the university
Native community.

The students also indicated a struggle that they had in the classroom. More than
one student told stories of being asked to represent “Native America” and speak in class
about tribes that they were not members. As well, students indicated that they were often
in classes in which instructors or classmates would make negative or stereotypical
comments regarding Native people. One student indicated she was so emotionally hurt

over her classroom experience that she dropped the course.

Implications

The themes that emerged from this study came from the lived experiences of
American Indian college students who participated in the Michigan Indian Leadership
program at some time in their youth. The themes identify that American Indian students
struggle to maintain a balance between Indian and non-Indian worlds. This study has
several implications that relate to higher education as well as American Indian students,
policy makers and Michigan State University. As non-Indian institutions of higher
education seek to increase diversity in their enrollment they must also recognize that
merely addressing the needs of “minority” students in general may not work for Native
students in particular. Michigan State University is a trailblazing institution for working

with and building relationships with its surrounding American Indian community. MILP

115

can serve as a model for other institutions to build upon their recruitment strategies for
Native students. However, MSU needs to be accountable for the financial struggle and
turmoil that the camp faces continuously.

The emergent themes in relation to the MILP program indicate that MH.P has
fostered an environment that is supportive of the diversity of the incoming American
Indian p0pu1ation. As the findings indicate, sensitivity must be directed to the varying
needs of American Indian students. This study focused on students from mostly
Michigan tribes, and yet students in the Southwest, Northeast and Plains areas may have
much different needs and experiences. Furthermore, the findings of this study indicate
that mixed-blood students have additional burdens and struggles and yet are often
extremely devoted to their communities. Native supporters need to protect these mixed-
blood students from exclusion and reconnect them to a culture that may have been lost to
them. Indian Country should harness their verve and energy as future leaders rather then
make them feel less “Indian.”

The support systems that are in place at many colleges and universities need to be
recognized as contributors to the retention of low-income, first-generation and minority
students. It is evident by this study that multiple academic support systems such as free
tutoring, mentoring, graduate preparation, and other support services programs assisted
with the retention of the Native students in this study. Also, providing places such as
culture rooms and cultural organizations served as opportunities for building supportive
networks.

American Indian students often come from some of the poorest families in the

nation. Native students indicated that financial support from tribes and other entities was

116

crucial in their ability to attend college, but they still suffered from financial stresses. We
need to continue to look at what types of financial support programs are available to
students and assist student where possible.

Native students in this study also identified that they struggled with navigating
between cultural and professional worlds. In the transition to college life, participants
often felt estranged from their home community and peers. Participants indicated that
they were viewed as “snobby” or “arrogant” because of their decision to attend college.
On the contrary, participants indicated that their non-Indian counterparts had the view
that they could not be professional and be Indian. These opposing ideas fostered
challenges for students as they sought to navigate the expectations of home, culture and
academics.

The American Indian faculty and staff communities at colleges and universities
should be commended for their role in the retention of Native students. Nearly all of the
students interviewed indicated that faculty and staff and in particular Native faculty and
were instrumental in their success. However, it should also be noted that these same
communities struggle with political and other issues and these issues also directly impact
students. A recommendation would be that American Indian faculty and staff attempt to
work out their differences without involving students in the political messes.

During the interviews, story after story was revealed the devastating effects of
substance abuse in the lives of students. Curt, one of the interviewees may never finish
his college education because of the time he spent in jail for driving while intoxicated.
Colleges and universities with populations of Indigenous students must find ways to

reconcile the impact of substance abuse issues with Native student’s ability to succeed in

117

 

school. While the student may not be the person with the problem, someone at home, in
the family or a peer on the campus has a substance abuse concern. As a Native student
organization advisor on a university campus, I have personally witnessed the distressing
loss of our students as they drop out one by one for alcohol and drug related issues. I
have also seen the aftermath of Native students that experienced sexual abuse while
under the influence as well as the stress that non-abusing friends suffer as they try to
rescue the drinker/user. This must become a priority. College campuses in general are
breeding grounds for parties and alcohol consumption. Support systems for Natives must
include Indigenous models of drug and alcohol prevention and recovery.

Some refer to this leadership that is positive and healthy as sober leadership.
Kevin Gover, a professor of law and an affiliate professor of American Indian studies at
Arizona State University identifies sober leadership as leadership that understands how
sobriety works in the daily lives of individuals and communities. He indicated, “Both
alcohol and suicide have become a part of our culture, and it’s a part we have to
acknowledge and we have to eliminate (Cover, 2004). Instilling the values of sobriety
and health into Indigenous youth and providing options outside of drinking is critical if
we are to cultivate our youth into strong leaders.

The participants in this study demonstrated resilience at various levels in relation
to their environment and daily lives. Support program like MH.P provide environments
rich in the qualities Wasonga, et. al (2003) indicate are required to support and nurture
students into successful learning. While non-Indian college campus climates are not
always the most inviting and welcoming place for Indigenous students (Hurtado, 1992), a

program like MILP that fosters the success and retention of the Peer Mentor can further

118

serve to commit and integrate the student to their academic institution (Tinto, 1975). The
MILP Native American Leadership Development Model emerged out the data analysis
and provides a visual guide to the processes that are designed to encourage youth and
college student success. This model’s focus in with the students that chose to pursue
higher education, but future studies may include looking at students that chose alternative

paths.

119

 

Youth attends MILP Program one to
multiple years
Experiences .
- Community development
. - Mentoring by Elders. Peer
Mentors. Program coordinator

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   
   

- Traditional teachings
/ - Cultural grounding

Student/Professional becomes

recruiter tor MILP or potential MILP

coordinator or workshop instructor I

/ \ Youth becomes student at
1 / community college or
university

Student graduates, attends
graduate school or becomes a Empowered,
protessional connection point in Balanced Student
the community

 

 

 

\

 

l

Student/ Peer-Mentor serves as role

 

 

Student returns to MILP as
/ Peer Mentor one or more
years while attending colege

 

 

 

through academic year via email,
pow wows, ceremonies participation

in home community
\ Student experiences leadership

development at MILP - possibly
promoted to Peer Leader. Student may
return as Peer Mentor more than one
year. continuously reinforcing leadership
development

model and keeps in touchwithyouth I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FIGURE 1: MEP American Indian Leadership Development Model

120

Limitations of the Study

As with any qualitative study there were several limitations. This study is limited
by time and environment. The experience of Michigan Native American students may be
quite different from Native students from other tribes throughout the United States and
Canada. Additionally, this study interviewed a rather small number of participants and
chose to focus only on those students that attended or were attending college, therefore
negating the voice of students that did not pursue higher education.

While all the student participants in this study identified as American Indian, each
person’s experiences were unique and no one person’s experience answers the needs of
all Indigenous students. Therefore, this study is not widely generalizable.

Some may indicate that a limitation to this study is that I am an Indigenous
researcher conducting this research and have had previous experience working with the
program. However, I would argue that by being a member of this community, I am able
to provide insight and add context to this study. Additionally, I was able to gain access
and acceptance because I have a level of trust and respect that was established with this
program several years ago. An outsider [non-Indian] would not have been able to gain
the level of access that I did with this particular program. My research stems from the
recognition that Indigenous communities are calling for us to study ourselves (Deyhle &
Swisher, 1997)

Some questions remain; did MILP work for all of its participants? Can programs
like MILP develop culturally grounded leaders accepted in the wider Native community?

While MILP provided a safe haven and a home-like atmosphere for all of its participants;

121

it may be that the struggle within the wider Native community between who is and is not

Indian will ultimately be the deciding factor in who will lead in Indian Country.

Recommendations for Future Research

There are several areas that would benefit from future research for this study.
One area is in relation to mixed-blood students and their experiences. This study pointed
to the varying needs of the diverse students interviewed. Mixed-blood students in
particular had to navigate many different aspects of their identity and place within the
community. Further investigation of this population could assist in developing more
supportive programs and assist these students in their college matriculation and success.

An additional area for further research would be the impact that alcoholism and
substance abuse has on American Indian students. This topic came up in every interview.
In some cases the student suffered from substance problems, but in nearly all interviews
someone in the family created chaotic circumstances with substance abuse, directly
affecting the student and his or her academic pursuits. This topic is so large that I chose
not to address it at length in this study, but it lends itself to additional inquiry.

Another area that would benefit from further study is that students indicated they
academically and personally benefited from varying support systems throughout their
academic career. These support systems included tutorial, mentoring, social, graduate
preparation, career preparation, and professional programs. Since we are in a time of
tight budgetary constraints and support programs are often at risk for cutbacks, further

research in this area would be beneficial. In particular, the higher education community

122

should know how to replicate, expand and improve programs like these at other campuses
to support Native students with their educational pursuits.

This study focused primarily on the academic experiences of American Indian
college students that attended the MILP program. Further research should be conducted
with the actual MILP participants while they are attending the youth camp. Additionally,
a longitudinal study could be conducted where these students are followed throughout
their high school and college academic career. This study could provide in-depth case
studies and insight into Native youth and their decisions to attend higher education.

Finally, this study selected only interviewees who attended MILP and graduated
or were currently attending college or university. Additional research should be
conducted with those MILP participants who chose not to attend college as well as those
who started college but did not complete. Those students have significant stories to tell
and their insight may give information as to the barriers faced by Native students from
not attending or completing higher education, as well as the alternative paths that they

chose to pursue.

Conclusions
The Michigan Indian Leadership Program demonstrated that Native programs,
which include off-reservation and bi-cultural people, could indeed promote the agenda of
Indian self-determination within the context of a mainstream institution of higher
learning by developing Native leaders. This program identifies that Native youth can
benefit from culturally appropriate and supportive environments and utilize outsiders and

non-Indians as a means of support. In general, what we know of the MILP program is

123

that is fosters students’ ability to attend school and become leaders. The program has
failed in keeping records of each individual student and his/her achievement, but
significant anecdotal evidence indicates that the pedagogical approach to MH.P has
increased the number of Native college graduates and Indigenous leadership throughout
the state of Michigan.

The presence of MILP over the last fifteen years has created a community within
MSU, the state of Michigan and beyond. MILP has followed an Indigenous paradigm in
increasing new leaders and fostering a cycle of Native leadership development as
reflected in the MILP Native Leadership Development Model. While many Native youth
programs seek to promote the language and culture of one tribe, MILP expands its
attempts at teaching traditional Native values while being inclusive of the bi-cultural
experience. MILP is a testimony of the benefits of a diverse American Indian community
working together to achieve the same goals of Indian self-determination. MILP fosters
an environment in which Native people can look to for developing Indigenous leaders
that will guide diversifying American Indian communities. Non-Indian colleges and
universities should seek to develop programs similar to MILP in an effort to support
Indigenous students at different levels of cultural competence. This will further the
agenda of the promotion of Native education without disenfranchising students from their

culture.

124

APPENDICES

125

APPENDIX A

CHRONOLOGY OF IMPORTANT DATES IN

INDIAN EDUCATION (Juneau, 2001)

126

APPENDIX A
CHRONOLOGY OF IMPORTANT DATES IN

H\lDIAN EDUCATION (Juneau, 2001)

The following are lists of dates and events that illustrate the history of major
Congressional acts and systems for controlling Indian tribes through an education
institution that was geared toward the creation of changes to their lifestyles. In the
beginning, these events involved the religious organizations of America and early contact
with European settlers but were eventually sanctioned by the US. Congress and, later,
the states. This chronology will demonstrate that the involvement of Indian tribes in
formal educational process(s) throughout the history of the United States is older than the
Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

1539 Lectures of Francisco de Victoria at the University of Salamanca, Spain, advocating
that Indians were free men and were exempt from slavery. They were to be dealt with
through treaties and fair trade.

1568 Society of Jesus establishes a school in Havana, Cuba for Indians of Florida.

1617 Moors Charity School founded as a training school for the education of youth of
Indian tribes of English youth and others at Lebanon, Connecticut (later becomes
Dartmouth College).

1619 Virginia Company started the first mission schools. Abandoned in 1622.

1723 William and Mary College opens special house for Indian students.

1775 Continental Congress approves $500 to educate Indians at Dartmouth College.

1778 On September 17, 1778, the first treaty between the United States and an Indian
Nation was signed with the Delawares.

1802 Congress approves appropriations, not to exceed $15,000 annually - to promote
civilization among the savages. Cherokees and Choctaws soon develop their own
systems of schools and academies.

1803 $3,000 was appropriated to civilize and educate the heathens .
1819 Early Civilization Fund authorized by Congress is given to the Indian agencies for
the purpose of having Christian missionaries “civilize” and “Christianize” the American

Indian population in the amount of $10,000. Missionaries continued to receive the
civilization funds until the 18705.

127

1824 Indian Service Department (BIA) created in the War Department.

1831 The Cherokee were forcefully removed from Georgia to Indian Territory in
Oklahoma. This removal began the destruction of the sophisticated education systems
developed by the Cherokee, Choctaw, Creeks, Chickasaws, and Seminoles.

1832 Post of Commissioner of Indian Affairs established in the War Department.

1834 Department of Indian Affairs organized under the Indian Trade and Intercourse Act
of June 30, 1834.

1842 Number of federal Indian schools reaches 37.

1849 Department of Indian Affairs placed in the Department of the Interior because of
the nature of the Indian lands. Gold discovered in California. Indian people lost most of
their possessions, tribal members and land base. The Mission Schools in California
survived with one-tenth of their former members.

1860 First federal boarding school established on the Yakima Indian Reservation in
Washington State.

1865 Congressional committee recommends creation of boarding schools away from
Indian communities, with emphasis on agricultural training for students. 1870 Federal
appropriations of $100,000 authorized to operate federal industrial schools for Indians.

1871 Treaty making period with Indian Nations ends.
1873 Congressional appeal of missionary society subsidies.

1877 The Board of Indian Commissioners included educational statistics in their annual
report creating a base line for measuring progress of Indian education.

1878 First 17 young Indians released as prisoners of war from Fort Marion, Florida,
begin to attend Hampton Normal and Industrial Institute at Hampton, Virginia. Special
“Wigwam” building constructed in the same year for Indian students, who would
continue to attend the school until 1923.

1879 Carlisle Indian School established at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, by Colonel R. H. Pratt
at an abandoned Army barracks, constituting the first off-reservation Indian school
enrolling children from the West and Midwest.

1880 Chemawa Boarding School for Indian children opens in Salem, Oregon.
1881 Number of federal Indian schools reaches 106. (By 1892, 12 boarding schools

would be established which would suppress use of Indian languages and practice of
Indian religions.)

128

1882 Congress provides that abandoned military posts be turned into Indian schools.
Haskell Institute established at Lawrence, Kansas.

1884 Congress prohibits the sending of Indian children to schools outside the state or
territory of their residence without the consent of their parents or natural guardians, and
forbids the withholding of rations as a technique of securing parental consent in an act of
August 15.

1885 Congress provides that Indians cannot be taken from a school in any state or
territory to a school in another state against their will or written consent of parents.
Moravian mission school established at Bethel, Alaska. Lumbees establish their own
school system in North Carolina.

1887 Lumbees establish Old Main Indian College, Pembroke, North Carolina.

1890 Federal tuition offered to public schools to educate a few Indian children. Thomas
J. Morgan published a code of “Rules for Indian Schools.” which indicated that
government schools were only intended to be a temporary provision to serve Indian
students until they could attend white schools. It marked the beginning of the practice of
sending certain Indian children to public schools.

1892 Commissioner of Indian Affairs authorized to make and enforce regulations
pertaining to attendance of Indian children at schools established and maintained for
them. Federal teachers and physicians placed under US. Civil Service.

1906 Congress abolishes Oklahoma Cherokee school system.

1916 Uniform course of study introduced into all federal Indian schools.

1918 Federal educational services limited to children of one-quarter or more Indian blood
under the terms of the Appropriation Act of May 25, 1918.

1920 Indian students in public schools outnumber students in federal schools for the first
time.

1921 Snyder Act is passed by Congress. This act authorized program services to Indian
people through the Bureau of Indian Affairs, still a primary legislative authority for the
financial resources of the BIA schools today.

1924 Congress declares Indians as citizens of the United States.

1928 Meriam Report. This report was critical of the BIA school system and altered the
federal approach to Indian education.

129

1933 Indian Emergency Conservation Works Program (IECWP) which provided
vocational training to Indians. There were 85,000 Indians served in the IECWP between
1933 and 1942. The Board of Indian Commissioners is disbanded by executive order.

1934 Johnson O’Malley Act. This act authorized the Secretary of the Interior to make
contracts with any state territory, political subdivision and other non-profit agency for the
education, medical attention, agricultural assistance and welfare of Indians. The impact of
the act was to get states to take an interest in the education of Indians by providing
federal aid to states to ease the impact of tax-free Indian lands on a states willingness to
provide a variety of services to Indians.

1950 Impact Aid and Public School Construction Amendments. Grants provided through
these acts afford general operating resources to public school districts enrolling Indian
children whose parents either live or work on federal property. By amendments to these
two pieces of legislation many eligible school districts become those which enroll Indian
children living on Indian reservations.

1952 Congress passes a program to relocate Indians away from the reservations in line
with the impending policy of termination of United States - Indian relations with some
tribes.

1953 House Concurrent Resolution 108 inaugurates Termination Era. The BIA ends
operation of all federal schools in Washington, Idaho, Michigan and Wisconsin. The BIA
boarding schools, however, are expanded.

1956 Congress expands vocational educational program of adult Indians residing on or
near reservations on August 3, designed to strengthen the relocation program of Indians.

1960 President Dwight D. Eisenhower instructs the Secretary of the Interior to accelerate
efforts to provide schools for all Indian children. Rocky Boy School opens in Montana
under an Indian Board of Education.

1962 Institute of American Indian Arts created in Santa Fe, New Mexico, using
remodeled facilities of an older boarding school to provide high school arts programs and
post-high school vocational arts program.

1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This act was designed to benefit all
disadvantaged youth in America. In 1966, Title I of this act was amended to include the
BIA. Title III was also to include the BIA. Title IV provided for regional education
laboratories for development of new and more effective programs for Indian students,
both public and federal.

1966 First Indian Teacher Corps project begun at Niobrara, Macy and Winnebago,
Nebraska, in Indian Country.

1967 The BIA establishes National Indian Education Advisory Committee.

130

1968 Number of federal Indian schools reaches 226. Sen. Robert Kennedy begins Senate
probe into Indian education. Navajo Community College, the first in the nation, founded
in Tsaile, Arizona President Johnson directs BIA to establish advisory boards at all its
schools.

1969 Indian Education: A National Tragedy . A National Challenge, Special Senate
Subcommittee Report on Indian Education released recommending increased Indian
control of education, creation of an exemplary federal school system, and establishment
of a National Indian Board of Education.

1970 National Indian Education Association, a union of Indian teachers, educators and
scholars, formed in Minneapolis, Minnesota. President Richard Nixon announces an era
of Indian control over decisions affecting Indians, including the field of education.
Haskell Institute becomes Haskell Indian Junior College at Lawrence, Kansas.

1971 Began the formation of Tribally Controlled Community Colleges throughout the
United States.

Indian Education Act of 1972. The US. Department of Education provides direct funds
for the special needs of all Indian students in public schools with 10 or more Indian
students (Now known as Title D( Indian Education). Priority funding given to Indian
tribes and organizations in use of discretionary program money. The National Advisory
Council on Indian Education was established to oversee provisions of the law, set
program priorities and assess Indian education throughout the federal establishment. The
Act enabled the US. Department of Education to begin active work with Indian
community colleges. Set-asides were authorized for training of teachers of Indian
children.

American Indian Higher Education Consortium formed in Boulder, Colorado, by
members of the Boards of Regents of the new Indian community colleges. First members
of the National Advisory Council on Indian Education appointed by President Richard
Nixon, under terms of the Indian Education Act of 1972.

1975 Congress passed the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act.

1990 The Opening of the Pipeline Conference on Higher Education and Native American
Studies. Tribal colleges receive land grant status at Urban Indian Education conference.

131

APPENDIX B

INFORMED CONSENT

132

APPENDIX B

STATEMENT OF INFORMED CONSENT

What is the study about?

The primary focus of inquiry for this study is to examine various aspects of the
Michigan Indian Leadership Program. The inquiry will focus on the successful MILP
participants and stakeholders involved in the program. This study will provide the
background and material needed to understand the MILP program historically as well as
understand its evolutionary processes.

What is my role as a participant?

As a participant, you are the most important contributor to the study. Your time and
your responses are all that are necessary. Your decision to participant in the study is
completely up to you. You may choose not to participate at all. You may choose not to
participate in an interview or focus group. You can refuse to answer any question you do
not want to answer and, you may decide to discontinue your participation at any time, for
any reason.

How much of my time will participating in this study take?
As a participant in this study you may be asked to participate in an individual
interview (90 to 120 minutes) and/or a follow-up interview(s) (90 to 120 minutes).

What about the results of this study?

All results will be kept strictly confidential and participants will remain anonymous in
any report of the research findings. A copy of the official report of findings will be made
available upon its completion. Your privacy will be protected to the maximum extent
allowable by law

What if I have any questions or concerns about this study?
If you have questions or concerns about the study, the researcher or anything related to
your participation you may contact either individual listed below:

JoLee Black Bear Dr. Marylee Davis

Researcher, Doctoral Candidate Faculty Supervisor

Department of Educational Administration Department of Educational Administration
355-7605 353-1717

webbjole@msu.edu davisml@msu.edu

 

 

If you have questions or concerns regarding your rights as a study participant, or are
dissatisfied at any time with any aspect of this study, you may contact — anonymously:
Ashir Kumar, M.D., Chair of the University Committee on Research Involving Human
Subjects (UCRIHS) 202 Olds Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824 517-355-2180.

FAX: (517) 432-4503, e-mail: ucrihs@msu.edu

133

Consent form and demographic information sheet

Thank you for agreeing to be part of my dissertation study. I value your willingness to
participate and the time you are volunteering. Please let me know if you have any
questions or concerns about your participation. I look forward to working with you.

Please complete the following information form so that we can begin!

Informed Consent
If you have questions or concerns regarding your rights as a study participant, or are
dissatisfied at any time with any aspect of this study, you may contact — anonymously:
Ashir Kumar, M.D., Chair of the University Committee on Research Involving Human
Subjects

(UCRIHS)
202 Olds Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824
517-355-2180
FAX: (517)432-4503,
e-mail: ucrihs@msu.edu

I have read the researcher’s statement regarding my voluntary role in the study. I agree
to participate voluntarily. I understand that I may choose not to participate in any portion
of the study at any time.

 

 

 

Signature: Date:

Address:

Number and street city state zip
Phone: Email:

 

 

The following information is for demographic purposes. It will be kept strictly
confidential.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name: Date of Birth:

Gender: M F Year in College:

College Attending/ed: Expected or Actual Graduation date: _
Major: Ethnic background:

Tribal Affiliation:

 

134

APPENDIX C

DATA COLLECTION FORM

135

APPENDD( C

 

 

DATA COLLECTION FORM
Michigan Indian Leadership Program Summer 2003
Date: Activity:
Reflections/feelings: Observations:

 

 

136

 

 

APPENDIX D

MH.P SUMMER STAFF TRAINING SCHEDULE

137

APPENDIX D

MILP SUMMER STAFF TRAINING SCHEDULE

 

2003
Friday
Julv 18, 2003

3:30 — 4:30 Staff Check-In and Move into Snyder Hall
4:30 Pick-up MSU vans at Motor pool
5:00 - 6:00 Dinner (Pizza in 109 Phillips Hall)

- Introductions

- Ice breakers
6:30-8:00 Retreat Overview (109 Phillips Hall)

-Retreat Goals & History

-Ru1es & Regulations

8: 15 —10:00 pm. FunTyme in Okemos

 

Sal—tum
July 19, 2003
8:00 — 9:00 Breakfast (Phillips or Mason/Abbott)
9:00 — 10:00 “Getting In Tune With You”

Dr. Bellamy (Snyder Trophy Room)

10:15-11:30 “Listening Skills & Conflict Resolution”
J oLee Blackbear (Snyder Trophy Room)
Noon - 1:00 Lunch
1:00-2:30 Day to Day activities (Snyder Trophy Room)
- Pick Committee Leaders

- Duty Schedule
- Group Assignments/Door Tags

138

2:30-3:30

3:45 -— 4:30

4:45 —5:30
5:30 —6:30
8:30 pm.

10:30

8:00 — 9:00
10:00

10:30

Noon — 1:00

1:30— 3:30

It ’3 Show Time.’!!.’

Practice Morning Ice breakers (Snyder Trophy Room)
Develop Skit for Orientation (Snyder Trophy Room)
Stuff Bags (Snyder Trophy Room)

Dinner (Phillips or Mason/Abbott)

Relocation Reenactment Practice (Baker Woodlot)

Talking circle with Tawa Ferris (Snyder Trophy Room)

Sunday
July 20, 2002

Breakfast (Phillips or Mason/Abbott)
Staff meeting/Housekeeping (MILP staff office)

Scout out Baker Woodlot

Lunch/ Organize Registration

Youth Registration

139

APPENDIX E

INTERVIEW PROTOCOLS

140

10.

ll.

12.

13.

APPENDIX E

INTERVIEW PROTOCOLS

Staff Schedules

. Could you tell me about the MILP and what you see as its missions, goals, values

and purpose?

Could you describe the basic structure of the current program?

How long have you been affiliated with this program and in what capacity?

What do you see as your role within the program? What is your vision for MILP?
How long and it what capacity do you see your involvement. What do you hope
for it after you leave the program?

I’d like to talk a little bit about the cultural aspects of the program. It terms of
identity, Native or otherwise, what have been some of your observations of past

participants?

What do you see as some of the more significant outcomes of MILP in terms of
participants or mentors experiences?

How would you explain the concept of tribalness and pan-Indianness in terms of
this camp?

Could you describe to me aspects of leadership within the context of this
program?

What do you or how do you identify Native leadership?
What do you or how do you identify Native identity?

How would you explain the level of social/community responsibility that many of
the program participants feel after their participation in the program?

Discuss with me the idea of community both in the spirit of this program and in a
broader sense for Native people.

Please reflect on your past and current relationship to the program. Could you
share some of your more profound and valuable experiences?

141

 

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

What have you seen in terms of spirituality? How has spirituality been
experienced within the program? How would you describe its presence within the
program?

What do you think the role the camp played in some participant’s decision to
obtain some type of higher education?

Do you have any evidence that more participants of this program attend some
type of higher education than non-participants?

Do you have a sense that participants have a better understanding of themselves
after participating in the program? How so?

Please talk to me about mentoring in relation to this program.
Talk to me about community building. What is your sense of it? Does the

program intentionally build community or do you think it may be an unconscious
outcome of the program.

 

Is there a community identity when it comes to Native people? Is this different
then ethnic identity?

If a study were conducted on this program what would you like to see come out of
it?

What are some of this programs success?

What are some of its failures? Where do you think it needs improvement?

I understand that Native children often come from background infiltrated with
alcoholism and other dysfunctions. How have you seen this play out in the

program?

What are some interventions or activities (cultural or otherwise) that you have
utilize to work with our around these problems.

Over time, the program has evolved. How would you describe its evolvement and
change over time?

Could you explain any commonalities and differences between the first camp you
experienced and the last one you ran?

Is there anything else you would like to add?

142

p—A
O

10.

11.

l2.

l3.

14.

15.

Other Subjects
Could you tell me how the concept of MILP came about and some of its history?

Could you tell me about the MILP and what you see as its missions, goals, values
and purpose?

Data has never been collected on the program, but from your experience did you
see evidence of it producing higher education participants?

I’d like to talk a little bit about the cultural aspects of the program. It terms of
identity, Native or otherwise, what have been some of your observations of past

participants?

What do you see as some of the more significant outcomes of MILP in terms of
participants or mentors experiences?

What do you or how do you identify Native leadership?
What do you or how do you identify Native identity?

How would you explain the level of social/community responsibility that many of
the program participants feel after their participation in the program?

Discuss with me the idea of community both in the spirit of this program and in a
broader sense for Native people.

Please reflect on your past relationship to the program. Could you share some of
your more profound and valuable experiences?

What have you seen in terms of spirituality? How has spirituality been
experienced within the program? How would you describe its presence within the

program?

What do you think the role the camp played in some participant’s decision to
obtain some type of higher education?

Do you have any evidence that more participants of this program attend some
type of higher education than non-participants?

Do you have a sense that participants had a better understanding of themselves
after participating in the program? How so?

Please talk to me about mentoring in relation to this program.

143

 

16. Talk to me about community building. What is your sense of it? Does the

17.

18.

19.

20.

program intentionally build community or do you think it may be an unconscious
outcome of the program.

If a study were conducted on this program what would you like to see come out of
it?

What were some of this programs success?
What were some of its failures?

Is there anything else you would like to add?

144

For Past MILP Participants
Recruitment
1. What was your motivation to attend higher education?

2. What was your motivation to select the career field you did?
3. What was your motivator for career choice?

Retention

1. What were effective support mechanisms in your academic achievement?
2. What is your assessment of academic achievement?

3. What perceived barriers existed for you?

4. How effective were support mechanisms for you?

5. What were your expectations of the institution?

6. What were your expectations of parent and family support?

7. What was the relationship between leadership, extracurricular activities and

 

campus participation as functions of success?
8. What were your expectations of your tribe?
9. How did you adjust to the campus environment and social climate?
10. How did you navigate?

Family

1. What is your family’s perspective on value of a college education?

2. What will the degree mean to them?

3. What is the impact of your family support on your success and failure?
4. How strongly do you identify with your tribe or tribal groups?

Institutional Support

1. What mentoring models were effective for you?
2. How did faculty/staff at institution support or hinder you?

Spirituality
1. How do you perceive yourself as a spiritual being?

Is there anything else you would like to add?

145

APPENDIX F

PROFILES OF ONE-ON-ONE INTERVIEWEES

146

 

APPENDIX F

PROFILES OF ONE-ON-ONE INTERVIEWEES

 

Identity (as
student
described)

Living
Experience

College

 

Alisha

Full-Blood

Reservation

University and Graduate
school

 

Andrew

Full-blood
Two-Tribes

Reservation

Tribal College, University

 

Carla

Mixed
Blood
Native/Cauc
asian

Urban

Community college transferred
to University

 

Charlotte

Mixed—
blood
Native/Cauc
asian

Urban and
some
reservation

Community college,
University — stop out —
returned

 

Curt

Full—Blood

Reservation
only

Vocational College

 

Matthew

Mixed-
blood
Native/Afri
can
American

Urban

Community College

 

Meredith

Mixed
Blood
Native/Cauc
asian

Urban

University, Graduate school

 

Tanya

Mixed
Blood
Native/Cauc
asian

Urban

Dual enrollment in Tribal
College and University,
applying to graduate school

 

*Eva Menefee

Full-blood
Founder

NA

 

 

*Michaelina
Magnuson

 

Mixed-
Blood
Native/Cauc
asian
Program
Coordinator

 

 

NA

 

* Names not changed

147

 

 

Description of Interviewees

A detailed disclosure of the interview participants will be limited for several
reasons. This limitation is warranted primarily because the focus of this study is on a
pre-college program at Michigan State University and since the Native American
community both in Michigan and on MSU’s campus is rather small, to provide large
amounts of detail, could possibly identify the participants. While all of the participants
were aware that their identities could be revealed, and none of them objected; I would
still like to take precautions to keep them from being identified. The objective of the

interviews was not to provide in-depth case studies, but rather to describe stories of

 

former MILP participants as a group rather than as individuals. In all cases, pseudonyms
are used to maintain confidentiality fro each of the participants. The names of the
program Founder, Eva Menefee and current program coordinator, Michaelina Magnuson
have not been changed.

Eva Menefee is the Michigan Indian Leadership Program founder. She is a full-
blood Oneida Indian from Canada. Menefee was raised as an urban Indian but came
from a traditional family. She worked at MSU for several years when she founded and
ran coordinated the program from 1988-1997. Eva received her Master’s degree in
Student Affairs at MSU. She now works at Lansing Community College and continues
to work with Michigan Indian students.

Michaelina Magnuson is the current MILP program coordinator. She is a member
of the Pokagon Band of Potowatomie. She worked at MILP as a Peer Mentor while an

undergraduate student at Michigan State University and later as an assistant program

148 l

coordinator. She is the first person to serve as a paid, full-time staff member of the
program. She is pursing a Master’s Degree in Student Affairs at MSU.

Tanya is an enrolled member of one of the Michigan tribes. At the time of the
interview she was in her early twenties. She is a mixed-blood and was raised in an urban
environment. She identifies herself as a “traditional Native woman”. She is an active
pow wow dancer, a former Indian Princess and participates in ceremonies and other
aspects of her culture. Tanya speaks and has been studying her Native language over the
last several years. She is more active in the wider Native community and activities than
those that are specific to her band/tribe. She was a Michigan Indian Leadership Program
participant for at least three years and a MILP counselor for two years. She has long,
medium brown hair, down to the middle of her back and her complexion is fair. She is
often identified as a Caucasian female. She received a Bachelor’s degree from Michigan
State University with a focus on American Indian studies and concurrently attended a
tribal college and received credentials for teaching Ojibwe. She has plans to attend
graduate school. One of her parents has a bachelor’s degree and the other has some
college.

Meredith is an enrolled member of one of the Michigan tribes. At the time of the
interview she was in her early twenties. She is a mixed-blood. She was raised in an
urban environment. She identifies herself as a traditional Native woman. She
participates in ceremonies and other aspects of her culture. She is very active in working
for Native people and her employment is geared around this. She was a MILP participant
for two or three years, and then became a camp counselor for about three years. She has

long, dark brown hair and her complexion is medium brown. She is recognizable as a

149

 

Native person. She graduated from Michigan State University with a bachelor’s degree.
She is pursuing a Master’s degree at the time of this interview. Both of her parents have
some college.

Andrew is an enrolled member of a Michigan tribe. At the time of the interview
he was in his early twenties. He is a full-blood, but is 1/2 of a Michigan tribe and l/2 of a
southwest tribe. He was raised on both reservations that each of his parents is from, but
spent his later years on the Michigan reservation. Andrew identifies himself as a 1

“traditional Native person”. He attends ceremonies and cultural activities when he can.

 

He is attending a university currently and also attended a tribal college. Neither parent
had a college education, but one parent enrolled in college after Andrew started and
received degree. Andrew’s complexion is dark and he is easily identifiable as a Native
person. His hair is black and short.

Carla is an enrolled member of a Michigan tribe. At the time of the interview she
was in her early twenties. She is a mixed-blood. She was raised in an urban
environment. She does not describe herself as a traditional Native person, but has strong
associations in the Native community. She does not attend ceremonies, but attends pow
wows as a social activity. She is currently attending a university outside of Michigan and
also attended a Michigan community college. She was a MH.P participant for two years
and has been a Peer Mentor for two years. Her mother went to undergraduate school
later in life and is presently working toward a Master’s degree. Her father did not attend
higher education, which reflected in his ability to earn promotions and gain better
employment, therefore he strongly encouraged Carla to go to college. Carla’s hair is long

is dark and long down to the middle of her back.

150

Curt is an enrolled member of his tribe, which is not located in Michigan. At the
time of the interview he was in his early twenties. Curt is a full-blood raised and
currently lives on his reservation. He describes himself as a traditional Native person and
is active in the cultural practices of his tribe. He is currently attending college. He
participated in the MILP program as a participant for five years and as a Peer Mentor for
about four years. He is easily identifiable as a Native person. He has short hair, but
wears some of it long and in braids. !

Alisha is an enrolled member of a Michigan tribe. At the time of the interview

 

she was in her mid twenties. She is a full-blood, raised and currently lives on her
reservation. She describes herself as a “traditional Native woman” and is a member of
her tribe’s medicinal society. She is a pow wow dancer and former Indian Princess. She
is not fluent in her language, but has a grasp of it. She was a MILP participant for two
years and a Peer Mentor for three. She is a graduate of Michigan State University and is
currently in a Master’s degree program. She is easily identifiable as a Native woman.
She has long, dark hair, which flows down the middle of her back. Her complexion is
dark.

Matthew is an enrolled member of a Michigan tribe. At the time of the interview
he was twenty. He is a mixed-blood. Matthew is 1/2 African American. He was raised in
an urban environment. Matthew has attended the MILP program throughout his youth
and now serves as a Peer Mentor. He recently attended a community college and has
“stopped out” for a while to determine where he is headed academically. Matthew is

identifiable as an African American male. He wears his hair long in dread locks.

l

Charlotte is an enrolled member of a Michigan tribe. At the time of the interview
she was in her early twenties. She is a mixed—blood. She was raised both in an urban
environment and on her reservation. Charlotte would not describe herself as a traditional
woman, but recently has been learning more about her culture. She attends pow wows
and is learning about more traditional aspects of her culture. Her career interests are to
work with and for Native people. She was a MH.P Peer Mentor for two years. She
currently attends a university and has aspirations of graduate school. She is identifiable
as an ethnic woman, but may also pass for white. Her hair is dark brown and long past

her shoulders. Her complexion is medium.

152

 

APPENDIX G

MILP 2003 SUMMER SCHEDULE

153

 

APPENDIX G

MILP 2003 SUMMER SCHEDULE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
7-8 A.M. Sunrise Sunrise Sunrise Sunrise Sunrise
Ceremony/ Ceremony/ Ceremony/ Ceremony/ Ceremony/
Breakfast Breakfast Breakfast Breakfast Breakfast
8-9 A.M. Roll Call/ Roll Call/ Roll Call/ Roll Call/ Roll Call/
Announcements Announcements Announcements Announcements Announcem
ents
9-10 A.M. Writing Center Forestry w/ Military Science Fill out
313 Bessey Hall Karen (2 Dem Hall Survey/
groups) 9:15-
11:00
10-1 1 English Prof. Fisheries and Horse Barn wl 9:00-1 l :00 Pass out
A.M. Gordon Henry Wildlife w/ Karen Yearbooks
Geoff 9:15-
11:00
1 l-Noon Rec. Time @ 1M Rec. Time Rec. Time at 1M Rec. Time at 1M Clean-Up &
Pack
Noon-l Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch & Lunch
1-2 PM. Youth Check-1n Horticulture Talking Circle MSU Dairy Biosystems Youth
with George Teaching and Engineering Check-Out
Research
2-3 PM. 1:30 - 3:00 Scavenger Hunt Landscape MSU Dairy Turfgrass Mtg.
in 4-H Gardens Design Store
3-4 PM. Orientation Committee Staff
Mtgs.
4-5 P.M. Native Games Children Garden U-Cue 4:30-5:30 Committee Admissions Wrap-up
4:00 - 5:30 Tour Mtgs. Presentation
Location TBA
5-6 PM. Dinner 5:30 - Dinner Dinner 5:45-6:30 Dinner Freshen Up
‘ 6230
L
1 6-7 PM. Ice Breakers Porcupine Quill Talent Show Dinner at
Cont.
7-8 PM. Pick Committees Work Committee Mtg. Tobacco Project Oldsmobile
Play Stadium
8-9 P.M. Pizza Party Amphitheater Relocation Pow-Wow and Lugnuts
Reenactment
9- 10 PM. Floor Mtg. Talking Circles Talking Circles Talking Circles game
w/ Tawa
10-11 Lights Out 10:30 Lights Out 10:30 Lights Out 10:30 Lights Out 10:30 Lights out 10:30
P.m.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

154

 

 

APPENDIX H

UCRIHS APPROVAL

155

’i‘l

 

 

orncr—z or
.ESEABCH
H108 AND
AWARDS

'ommlttu on
rclr Involving
nan Subjects

State University
202 Olds Hall
rst Lansing, MI
48824

517/355-2180
517/432-4503

:dU/user/UCtihs
.rih3@msu.edu

tff.='nn3tiveacrion.
tun/1y institution

  

MICHIGAN STATE

UNIVERSITY

 

July 7, 2003

TO: Marylee DAVIS
420 Erickson

RE: IRB# 03-433 CATEGORY: EXPEDITED 1-1,1-2,1-3,1-4,

APPROVAL DATE: July 2, 2003
EXPIRATION DATE:June 2, 2004

TITLE: ACADEMIC SUCCESS OF AMERICAN INDIAN STUDENTS: THE IMPACT
OF THE MICHIGAN: INDIAN LEADERSHIP PROGRAM (MILP)

The University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects' (UCRIHS) review of this

project is complete and I am pleased to advise that the rights and welfare of the human

subjects appear to be adequately protected and methods to obtain informed consent are

appropriate. Therefore, the UCRIHS approved this project.

RENEWALS: UCRIHS approval is valid until the expiration date listed above. Projects
continuing beyond this date must be renewed with the renewal form. A maximum of four such
expedited renewals are possible. Investigators wishing to continue a project beyond that time
need to submit a 5-year application for a complete review.

REVISIONS: UCRIHS must review any changes in procedures involving human subjects, prior I

to initiation of the change. If this is done at the time of renewal, please include a revision form
with the renewal. To revise an approved protocol at any other time during the year, send your
written request with an attached revision cover sheet to the UCRIHS Chair. requesting revised
approval and referencing the project's IRB# and title. Include In your request a description of
the change and any revised instruments, consent forms or advertisements that are applicable.
PROBLEMS/CHANGES: Should either of the following arise during the course of the work,
notify UCRIHS promptly. 1) problems (unexpected side effects, complaints, etc.) involving
human subjects or 2) changes in the research environment or new information indicating
greater risk to the human subjects than existed when the protocol was previously reviewed and
approved. ,

If we can be of further assistance, please contact us at (517) 355-2180 or via email:
UCRIHS@msu.edu. Please note that all UCRIHS forms are located on the web:
httpzllwww.msu.edu/userlucrihs

Ashir Kumar, M.D.
UCRIHS Chair

AK: jm

cc: JoLee Black Bear
332-Eppley Center

156

 

 

 

 

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

157

BIBLIOGRAPHY

American Indian Communities in Minnesota Definitions
http/lwwwseqate.leg.state.mn.us/departments/scr/report/bands/DEFIl‘IITION.HTM

American Indian Education Foundation (2003). History and facts about Indian
education. Http://www.aiefprograms.org/history facts/historv.html. Retrieved
3/17/2003.

Anderson, K. (2000). A recognition of being: Reconstructing Native womanhood.
Second Story Press: Toronto.

Apps, J .W. (1988). Higher education in the learning society: Meeting new demands for
education and training. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publications.

Astin, A. W. (1984, July). Student involvement: A theory for higher education. Journal
of College Student Personnel, 25(4). pp. 297-308.

Atkinson, D. & Morton, G, & Sue, D. (1993). Counseling American Minorities: A
cross—cultural perspective. (4‘h ed.). Madison-WI: Brown & Benchmark.

Bad Wound, B. (2000). American Indian youth outnumber other in just system. Indian
Country news. August.

Bamhardt, C. (1999). Kuinerrarrniut Elitnaurviat: The school of the people of
Quinhagak: Case study. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Education Lab;
Fairbanks: University of Alaska. (ERIC Document ED437252).

Barr, R.B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning — A new paradigm for
undergraduate education. Change, 27 (6), 12-25.

Bowker, A. (1993). Sisters in the blood: The education of women in Native America.
Newton, MA: WEEA Publishing Center.

Brayboy, B. (1999). Climbing the ivy: Examining the experiences of academically
successful Native American Indian undergraduate students at two ivy league
universities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.

Brayboy, B.M. & Deyhle, D. (2000). Insider-Outsider: Researchers in American Indian
Communities. Theory into Practice. 39 (3).

Brendtro, L. Brokenleg, M., & Van Bockem, S. (1990). Reclaiming youth at risk: Our
hope for the future. Bloomington, IN: National Education Service.

Cajete, G. (2000). Native Science: Natural laws of interdependence. Clear Light
Publishing.

158

 

Carrol, RE. (1978). Academic performance and cultural marginality. Journal of
American Indian Education, 18 (1), 11-16.

Chavers, D. (2000a). Deconstructing the myths a research agenda for American Indian
Education. New Mexico: Catching the Dream.

Chavers, D. (2000b). Indian teachers and school improvement. Journal of American
Indian Education, 39 (2). 49-55.

Chronicle of Higher Education. (1998). Almanac of higher education, 1998-99.
Washington, DC: Chronicle of Higher Education.

Cleary, L.M., & Peacock, TD. (1998). Collected wisdom: American Indian education.
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Connelly, F.M. & Clandinin, DJ. (1994). Telling teaching stories. Teacher Education
Quarterly. 21 (1), 145-158.

Cook, J. (1999). United National Indian Tribal Youth, Inc. (UNITY) homepage.
Internet: http://www.unityinc.org/

Creswell, J. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage
Publications: California.

Cross, W. (1991). Shades of black: Diversity in African-American identity.
Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

DeGagné, M. (2002). Interaction without integration: The experience of successful First
Nations students in Canadian post secondary education. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Michigan State University.

Deloria, V. (1994). God is red. Fulcrum Publishing. Colorado.

Deloria, V. (1993). Tribal colleges and traditional knowledge. Tribal College Journal.
Autumn, p. 31-32.

Deyhle, D. (1992). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New
York: The New Press.

Deyhle, D. (1995). Navajo youth and Anglo racism: Cultural integrity and resistance.
Harvard Educational Review, 65, 403-444.

Deyhle, D. & Margonis, F. (1995). Navajo mothers and daughters: Schools, jobs, and
the Family. Anthropology & Education Quarterly. 26 (2) 135-167.

159 /

Donelly, J .H. & Ivancevich, J. M. & Gibson, J. (1905). Organizations: Behavior,
structure, processes 5th Ed. Plano, TX: Business Publications Inc.

Falk, D. R., & Aitken, L. P. (1984). Promoting retention among American Indian
College Students. Journal of American Indian Education, 23(2), pp. 24-31.

Fanon, F. (1968). The wretched of the earth. New York: Grove Press.

Fenstermacher, G.D., & Soltis, J .F. (1992). Approaches to teaching. (2 Ed.). New York:
Teachers College Press.

Freire, P. (1990). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: W. W. Norton.

Fontana, A. & Frey, J .H. (1994). Interviewing: The art of science, In N.K Denzin & Y.
S. Lincoln. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

Fort Peck Tribal College Website: http://www.fpcc.edu/fem/tribal colleges.htm
retrieved May 31, 2004.

Gamers, L., & Kimmel, D. (1991). Lesbian and gay male dimensions in the
psychological study of human diversity. In J. Goodchilds (Ed.), Psychological
perspectives on human diversity: Masters lecturers (pp. 143-189). Washington,
DC. American Psychological Association.

Garroutte, EM. (2001). The racial formation of American Indians negotiating legitimate
identities within tribal and federal law. American Indian Quarterly. 25 (2), 224-
239.

Gilbert, W.S. (2000). Bridging the gap between high school and college. Journal of
American Indian Education, 39.

Gover, K. (2004). Sober leadership in the new millennium. Winds of Change. Spring,
p. 6

Hassin, J. & Young, R. (1999). Self-sufficiency, personal empowerment, and community
revitalization: The impact of a leadership program on American Indians in the
Southwest. American Indian Culture and Research Joumal, 23 (3), 265-286.

Haynes, J. (2001). Identifying the identified: the need for critical exploration of Native
American identity within educational contexts. Action in Teacher Educagion 22

(4 ), 40-47.

Helms, J. (1990). Black and White racial identity attitudes: Theory, research and
practice. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

160

 

HeavyRunner, I. & Morris, J .S. (1997). Traditional native culture and resilience.
Research Practice. 5 (1). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota. Center for
Applied Research and Educational Improvement (CARE). College of Education
and Human Development.

Hillberg, R.S. & Tharp, RC. (2002). Theoretical perspectives, research findings, and
classroom implications of the learning styles of American Indian and Alaska
Natives students. (ERIC Digest). Charleston, WV. (EDO-02-03).

hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New
York, NY: Routledge.

Homett, D. (1989). The role of faculty in cultural awareness and retention of American
Indian college students. Journal of American Indian Education, 29(1), 12-18.

Horse, P. (1997). Racial identity development and Native Americans. Paper presented at
the 10th annual national conference on Race & Ethnicity in American Higher
Education, Orlando, Fl.

Huffman, TE. (1995). The transculturation of Native American college students. In J .J .
Macionis & N.V. Benokraitis (Eds), Seeing ourselves: Classic, contemporary,
and cross-cultural readings in sociology (pp. 200-208). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.

Huffman, TE. (2001). Resistance theory and the transculturation hypothesis as
explanations of college attrition and persistence among culturally traditional
American Indian students. J oumal of American Indian Edtfltion. 40 (3) p 1-22.

Hurtado, S. (1992). The campus racial climate: Contexts for conflict. The Journal of
Higher Education, 63 (5), 539-569.

Hurtado, S., Milem, J ., Clayton-Pedersen, A., & Allen, W. (1998). Enhancing campus
climate for racial/ethnic diversity: Educational Policy and Practice. The Review
of Higher Education, 21 (3), 279-302.

Indian Act ( RS. 1985, c. I-5 )

Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to
adolescence. New York: Basic Books.

J anesick, V.J. (1994). The dance of qualitative design: Metaphor, methodolatry, and

meaning. In N .K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (1994). Handbookofqualitative
research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

161

 

Johnson, G.G., (2003). Resilience, a story: A postcolonial position from which to
[re]view Indian Education framed in “At-Risk” ideology. Educational Studies.
34 (2)

Johnson, V., Benham, M.K.P., & VanAlstine, MJ. (2003). Native leadership: Advocacy
for transformation, culture, community, and sovereignty. In M. Benham, W.

Steiin (Eds). The renaissance of American Indian higher education, 149-165.

Johnston, B. (1995). The Manitous: The supernatural world of the Ojibway. New York:
HarperCollins Publishers, Inc..

Juneau, S. (2001). A history and foundation of American Indian educational policy.
Montana Office of Public Instruction.

Kidwell, CS. (1985). Educational policy and graduate education for American Indian
students. In J. Joe (Ed.), American Indian policy and cultural values: Conflict
and accommodation. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Publishing Services Department.

Krouse, SA. (1999). Kinship and identity: Mixed bloods in urban Indian communities.
American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 23 (2), 73-89.

Lin, R.L., LaCounte, D., & Eder, J. (1988).: A study of Native American students in a
predominantly white college. Journal of Americgn Indian Education, 27(3), 8-15.

Locke, L.F., Spirduso, W.W., & Silverman, SJ. (1987). Proposals that work: A guide
for planning dissertations and grant proposals (2"d ed.). Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.

Lomawaima, T. & McCarty, T. (2002). Reliability, validity, and authenticity in
American Indian and Alaska Native research. ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural
Education and Small Schools. EDO-RC-02-4.

Mallea, J. (1989). Schooling in a plural Canada. Philadelphia, PA: Multilingual Matters
Ltd.

McCarty, T. & Others (1991). Classroom inquiry and Navajo learning styles: A call for
reassessment. Anthropology & Education Quarterly. 22 (1), 42-59.

Misesuah, DA. (1998). Natives and academics: Researching and writing about
American Indians. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Mihesuah, DA. (1998). American Indian identities: Issues of individual choices and
development. American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 22 (2), 193-226.

Mihesuah, D.A. & Cavender Wilson, A. (2002). Indigenous Scholars versus the Status
Quo. The American Indian Quarterly, 36 (1), 145-8.

l

Mills, C. (1997). The racial contract. New York: Cornell University Press.

Nagel, J. (1995). American Indian ethnic renewal: Politics and the resurgence of
identity. American Sociological Review, 60(6), 947-965.

Native American Rights Fund [NARF]. (2004). http://www.narf.org/

National Center for Health Statistics (2004). Center for disease control mortality data
from the national vital statistics system website.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/maior/dvs/mortdata.htm

National Congress of American Indians (2004). Our history.
http://www.ncai.org/main/pages/ncai profile/history.asp retrieved April 25, 2004.

National Council of Educational Opportunity Associations (NCEOA). (2004).
Available: httpz/lwww.trioprograms.org

Noel, J. (2002) Education toward cultural shame: A century of Native American
Education. Educational Foundations, 16(1), 19-32.

O’Banion, T. (1997). A learning college for the 21St century. Phoenix, AZ: ACE/Oryx.
Palmer, P]. (1998). The Courage to Teach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.

Pavel, D.M. (1995). Characteristics of American Indian and Alaska Native education:
Results from the 1990-91 schools and staffing survey. ED381338.

Pavel, D.M. (1999). Schools, principles, and teachers serving American Indian and
Alaska Native students. ERIC Digest (EDO-RC-98-9).

Persson, D. (1986). The changing experience of Indian residential schooling: Blue
Quills, 1931-1970. In J. Barman, Y. Herbert, D. McCaskill (Eds.). Indian
education in Canada: Vol. 1. The legacy (pp 150-168).

Pewewardy, C. (1998, June). Will the “real” Indians please stand up. Multicultural
Review, 7(2), 36-42.

Pewewardy, C. & Hammer, PC. (2003). Culturally responsive teaching for American
Indian students. (ERIC Digest). Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural
Education and Small Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EDO-
RC-O3-10.

Phinney, J .S. (1989). Stages of ethnic identity in minority group adolescents. Journal of
Early Adolescence, 9, 34-49.

163

Phinney, J .S. (1990). Ethnic identity in adolescents and adults: Review of research.
Psychological Bulletin, 108: 499-514.

Phinney, J .S. (1993). A three-stage model of ethnic identity development in adolescence.
In Bemal, M. & Knight, G. [Eds] Ethnic identity: Formation and Transmission
among Hispanics and other minorities: 61-79’ Albany, NY: State University of
New York Press.

Quinn, W.W. (1990). The southeast syndrome: Notes on Indian descendant recruitment
organizations and their perceptions of Native American culture. American Indian

Quarterly, 147-154.

Rendon, L., & Garza, H. (1996). Closing the gap between two and four-year institutions. 1
In Educating a New Majority: Transforming America’s Educational System for 11
Diversity. L. Rendon and R. Hope (Eds.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass .

Scott, W.J. (1986). Attachment to Indian culture and the ‘difficult situation’. Youth &
Society, 381-395.

Senge, PM. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York: Currency Doubleday.

Shutiva, C. (2001). Career and academic guidance for American Indian and Alaska
Native youth (ERIC Digest). Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural
Education and Small Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO.
ED458062).

Smith, LT. (2001) Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples.
New York: Pal grave.

Snipp, CM. (1989). American Indians: The first of this land: New York: Russell Sage.

Snipp, CM. (1992). Sociological perspectives on American Indians. Annual Review of
Sociology, 18, 351-371.

Starna, W. (1991). The southeast syndrome: The prior restraint of a non-event.
American Indian OuJarterly, 15 (4) 493-502.

Strand, J.A. & Peacock, TD. (2002). Nurturing resilience and school success in
American Indian and Alaska Native students. ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural
Education and Small Schools. EDO-RC-02-l l.

Strang, W., von Glatz, A. & Cahape Hammer, P. (2002). Setting the agenda: American
Indian and Alaska Native education research priorities. Eric Digest EDO-RC-02-
14. December.

 

164

Stein, W.J. (1990). Founding of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium.
Tribal College Journal Summer, 18—22.

Swisher, K. (1998). Why Indians should be the ones to write about Indian education. In

D.A. Mihesuah, (ed): Natives and Academics: Researching and Writing About
American Indians. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

Swisher, K., & Deyhle, D. (1987). Styles of learning and learning styles: Educational
conflicts for America Indian youth. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development, 8, 345-360.

Swisher, K., & Deyhle, D. (1988). Adapting instruction to culture. In J. Reyhner (Ed.),
Teaching American Indian students. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma.

Swisher, K. & Deyhle, D. (1989). The styles of learning are different, but the teaching is
just the same. Suggestions for teacher of American Indian youth. Journal of
American Indian Education 28 (Special Edition), 1-14.

Swisher, K., & Deyhle, D. (1992). Adapting instruction to culture. In J. Reynar (Ed.).
Teaching American Indian students. (pp. 81-95). Norman: University of
Oklahoma.

Swisher, K., & Deyhle, D. (1997). Research in American Indian and Alaska Native
education: From assimilation to self-determination. In M. Apple (Ed.) Review of
Research in Education. (pp. 113-194). Washington, DC: American Educational
research Association.

Swisher, K. & Hoisch, M. (1992). Dropping out among American Indian and Alaskan
Natives. A review of studies. Journal of American Indian Education. 31 (2), 3-23.

Tajfel, H. (1978). The social psychology of minorities. London, Minority Rights Group.

Tinto, Vincent, (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent
research. Review of Educational Research, 45(1).

US. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census (1993).

US. National Center for Education Statistics (1995). Digest of education statistics
annual, Washington DC.

US. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, (2001). Paving

the way to postsecondary education: K-12 intervention programs for
underrepresented youth. NCES 2001-205r, Washington DC.

165

 

US. Department of Health and Human Services (2004). Indian health services: The
federal health program for American Indians and Alaskan Natives website
httpzl/www.ihs.gov/NonMedicalPrograms/IHS Stats/.

Villenas, S. (1996). The colonizer/colonized Chicana ethnographer: Identity,
marginalization, and co-optation in the field. Harvard Educational Review. 66
(4). 711-731.

Wang, M., Haertel, G., & Walberg, H. (1994). What influences learning? A content
analysis of review literature. Journal of Education Research, 84 (30-43).

Wasonga, T., Christman, D., Kilmer, L. (2003). Ethnicity, gender and age: Predicting

 

resilience and academic achievement among urban high school students. F3
American Secondary Education, 32 (1). t
Waterman Wittstock & Salinas (no date). A brief history of the American Indian

Movement. Retrieved http://www.aimovement.org/ggclhistoryhtml April 25,
2004.

Weibel-Orlando, J. (1991). Indian Country, L.A.: Maintaining ethnic community in
complex society. Champaign, H3; University of Illinois Press.

Whirlwind Soldier, L. (1997). Inventing new approaches to tribal education. Tribal
College Journal, Spring, 38-19.

Weaver, H. (2001) Indigenous identity. What is it, and who really has it? American
Indian Quarterly. Spring 2001, Vol. 25, 2.

Writer, J .H. (2001). Identifying the identified: The need for critical exploration of
Native American identity within educational contexts. Action in Teacher
Education. Vol. 22, 4, pp. 40—47.

Yazzie, T. (2002) Culture deep within us: Culturally appropriate curriculum and
pedagogy in three Navajo teachers’ work. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,

Harvard University.

Zalenik, A. (1992). Managers and Leaders: Are they different? Harvard Business
Review March/April p.126.

, 1997. Unpublished report of the Michigan Indian Leadership Program.
, 1999 Unpublished Report to the Provost: Michigan Indian Leadership Program.

_, (1996). Unpublished MILP Program Report: Michigan Indian Leadership
Program.

166

   

Iljljlijjijjijjltill]