Volume 16 Number 2
January 1977

Carolyn Croft

WHITE superiority and Indian inferiority have characterized most government policy of Indian treatment since the arrival of the white man in this country. Indians were removed forcibly from their ancestral lands, and in most land acquisition agreements, a promise of education was involved. Therefore, the position of the Indian is different educationally from that of other minorities in the United States.

Meyer (1972) stated, "In the efforts to provide better schooling in America, one group in the population has been tragically overlooked. The first American, the Indian, is the last American educationally, as he is economically, socially, and politically." The purpose of this review is to examine the education of the American Indian with a focus on academic achievement.

Private education, with an emphasis on religious sources, was dominant from the arrival of the white man until the 19th century. Governmental domination began with the establishment of the Bureau of Indian Affairs in 1824.

The famous Meriam (1928) report was the first extensive and probably the best critical appraisal of Indian affairs ever made. It presented a highly unfavorable evaluation of education for Indians citing low pupil achievement, high attrition rates, irrelevant programs, and inadequate facilities.

Forty years later, a report by the United States Senate Special Subcommittee, chaired by Senator Edward Kennedy, on Indian Education (1969) was equally unfavorable, repeating many of the same criticisms and making similar recommendations. The members of the committee concluded that Indian education was a national tragedy and a failure of major proportions. The Senate subcommittee report has been criticized by Coombs (1970), a BIA employee, as being slanted, sometimes inaccurate, and totally and intentionally negative, with complete disregard for the encouraging and even dramatic educational advances which Indians are making. The basic conclusions of the report, however, concerning the serious educational disadvantages of Indian Americans are not and cannot be challenged (Bass, 1971b).

In 1970, Robert J. Havighurst’s summary report and recommendations on the national study, The Education of Indian Children and Youth (1970), was issued. An overriding theme throughout the study was that there needs to be recognition of Indian authority and responsibility for the education of Indian children and youth. This conclusion also had been reached by the U.S. Senate Special Subcommittee (1969).

The Indian Education Act of 1972 provided federal assistance in education over and above the limited funds appropriated annually for Indian education programs in the Office of Education, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior, to help close the gap which now exists between Indian education and the general educational level of the United States. Noteworthy is the fact that the new Act created the National Advisory Council for Indian Education to provide policy direction and guidance to the Congress and those responsible for implementing the Act. The Council is comprised of 15 Indian or Alaskan Natives appointed by the President from a select list recommended by Indian tribes and organizations throughout the United States.

All of these signals indicate that this is indeed a time of change in Indian education. While the nature of change is not known, evidence indicates that the direction for change will come from the tribal groups themselves.

The academic achievement of the American Indian child has been documented throughout the literature. There is ample evidence from studies such as Thompson (1959), MacGregor (1946), Joseph (1949), Voyat (1970), and Havighurst (1970), that Indian children are as intelligent and educable as other American children. But research also suggests that Indian pupils do not achieve as well in school as do white children. In a comprehensive and significant study, Coombs (1958) found that academic achievement of Indian pupils, as measured by standardized tests, was below that of white pupils at every grade level tested and fell progressively further below at higher grade levels. The research of Coleman (1966) confirmed the findings of Coombs and evidenced a pattern of progressive retardation. On the average, Indian students enter ninth grade achieving at slightly more than one grade level below the national average and complete twelfth grade nearly three years below the national average.

Numerous studies have been conducted to examine the academic achievement of American Indian students, yet many have not examined levels of achievement in various types of schools attended. The extensive study by Coombs (1958) revealed that Indian students in public schools achieved at a higher level, on the average, than did those in Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) schools. However, since initial individual pupil differences were not controlled statistically, differences in group achievement could not be attributed to the educational experiences provided to students by the schools. Although Coombs was careful to point out that differences in socio-economic backgrounds of the pupils in the groups being compared may have accounted for the disparities in achievement levels, he concluded that generally, Indian students would make greater academic progress in public schools than in BIA schools.

In a four-year study, Bass (1971a) examined academic achievement of Indian high school students in four types of schools: federal on-reservation, federal off-reservation, public on-reservation, and public off-reservation. In comparing the four groups on the basis of academic achievement, post-test achievement scores were used as a criterion, and differences in means were tested for significance by analysis of co-variance, using pretest intelligence and achievement scores as control variables. On the basis of adjusted criterion means, which were calculated where significant differences occurred, a clear hierarchial pattern of achievement emerged. There was, therefore, no evidence that academic achievement was superior or inferior, in any particular type of school. There was some evidence, however, that individual schools differ in the achievement of Indian students.

McKinley (1976) investigated current and projected educational needs of Oklahoma Indian children. His findings included: (a) Oklahoma Indian parents and citizens place top priority on basic skill development for their children (reading, writing, mathematics); and (b) the academic achievement level of the public school Indian student in Oklahoma is lower than their respective class average, but significantly higher than that of the dormitory Indian students attending Bureau of Indian Affairs boarding schools.

There is general agreement that American Indians do not differ from other groups in inherited intellectual capacity, but that they are, nevertheless, seriously disadvantaged educationally. Educators have tended to attribute Indian children’s learning difficulties largely to out-of-school factors such as home environment, poverty, isolation, language and cultural differences. Social scientists have tended to fault the schools because of irrelevant curricula, inappropriate learning materials, inadequate teachers, cultural bias, and absence of Indian involvement and control (Bass, 1971b). These authorities also agree that differences in family background account for more variations in school achievement than do differences in school characteristics, but that achievement of minority students depends more upon school factors than does the achievement of non-Indian students.

Thompson (1975) called attention to the problem that, by and large, the educators of American Indian youth are upper middle-class non-Indians. He felt that few of the teachers possess an awareness of the culturally, socially, or racially different and without such awarenesses that Indian students could not achieve to the fullest of their academic capabilities.

In spite of some encouraging progress, American Indians continue to suffer serious educational deficits. The research on academic achievement of American Indian students indicates these students have lower achievement gains when compared to their respective class averages. The schools, though not culpable for all the educational deficiencies of Indian students, do have a responsibility to seek more effective ways of educating them to improve their quality of education. Therefore, the following recommendations are made:

Bass, W. P. An Analysis of Academic Achievement of Indian High School Students in Federal and Public Schools. Albuquerque: Southwestern Cooperative Educational Laboratory, 1971a.

Bass, W. P. "Formal Education for American Indians." Research and Development in Education. Volume 4, p. 21-32, Summer, 1971b.

Coleman, James S., and others. Equality of Educational Opportunity. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1966.

Coombs, L. M. "The Indian Student Is Not Low Man on the Totem Pole." Journal of American Indian Education. Volume 9, p. 1-9, May, 1970.

Coombs, L. M, and others. The Indian Child Goes to School. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1958.

Havighurst, R. J. The Education of Indian Children and Youth. The National Study of American Indian Education: Summary Report and Recommendations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.

"Indian Education Act." Journal of American Indian Education. Volume 14, p. 5-6, May, 1975.

Joseph, A. and others. The Desert People. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1949.

MacGregor, G. Warriors Without Weapons. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1946.

Meriam, L. and others. Problem of Indian Administration. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1928.

Meyer, D. E. "We Continue To Massacre the Education of the American Indian." Journal of American Indian Education. Volume 11, No. 2, p. 18-25, January, 1972.

Thompson, H. Today’s Dropouts—Tomorrow’s Problems. Lawrence, Kansas: Bureau of Indian Affairs Publication Service, Haskell Institute, 1959.

Thompson,, Thomas A. "American Indian Teacher Training: The Teacher Corps Model. Journal of Teacher Education. Volume 26, p. 123-124, Summer, 1975.

United States Senate. Special Subcommittee on Indian Education. Indian Education: A National Tragedy—A National Challenge. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1969.

Voyat, G. and Silk, S. "Cross-Cultural Study of Cognitive Development on the Pine Ridge Reservation." Pine Ridge Research Bulletin. Volume II, p. 50-73, 1970.