Volume 17 Number 1
October 1977

Carl R. Cooley

Investigating similarities and differences in value systems and cultures can produce an understanding of potential classroom procedures, adaptive skills and conditions under which they could be utilized.

For this study, the basic principles of social learning theory were reviewed, relating them to the effects that early modeling, cultural traditions, and customs have on the ways in which Indian youth accept or reject education. It is believed that in this manner specific differences can be delineated, thus suggesting recommendations regarding improved ways of handling such differences.

In order to accomplish this purpose, however, it was first necessary to consider what cultures are and why they can be different, to review the basic principles of social learning theory, then to relate them to the effects that early modeling, cultural traditions, and customs have on the ways in which Indian youth accept or reject education.

Social change is most enduring when it occurs in the context of change in basic structural determinants. Social learning theory helps identify the resulting products of a given environment, and how knowledge of similarities or differences between cultures can provide us with better teaching tools. Any definitions of cultural values should reflect the extent to which specific behaviors of a given culture are adaptive in the environment where they occur and how these values can create conflict or enhance learning.

Knowledge of particular values is important because expectations for performance in a bicultural classroom requires Indian children to adapt to cultural and educational references that do not coincide with their own.

It was found that in these past few years, programs such as High Challenge, Head Start and Early Childhood were initiated to help the Indian child to compensate for his apparent disadvantaged status. These programs generally held to the belief that Indian children were: 1) either disadvantaged culturally or environmentally, 2) that their parents and elders were not sufficient models for the main American culture, 3) that they were being deprived of proper educational opportunity. Generally their philosophy held that the Indian child needed to be "filled" with more information prior to formal education. Much research has been accomplished to attempt proof of the usefulness of these programs.

These efforts to enhance learning opportunities of Indian and other minority group children in recent years have not been very successful. This is true even though considerable psychological and educational research has been devoted to the development of new processes and materials. Such development has emanated primarily from research conducted by educational psychologists and educators from within their own cultural system; perhaps the flaw lies here. Programs, developed without including the cultural system of whom you are educating, will not be as successful as they could be.

Culture was generally defined as the customs, traditions, and values of a given group of people. A culture develops among its members certain traits, habits, and personality types. Cultures develop differentially; each having its own value system, norms and traditions that were developed over time for the purpose of accommodation to a particular environment. Each culture develops its own models, forms of modeling and methods of reinforcement contingent to this accommodation.

It is wrong for us to assume that an Indian child is "culturally disadvantaged." The way that one learns from inappropriate models in early life ignores the rich cultural heritage and development within a culture. When one considers how much is learned in a given culture at an early age, it is not surprising that Indian children face difficulty when entering America's social institutions.

The primary modality of learning and how learning occurs was discussed. Learning has been defined by McKeachie and Doyle (1971) as "a process in which new information, habits, or abilities are acquired; in general, any modification of behavior due to contact with the environment." Ruch and Zimbardo (1968) added that in spite of present ignorance of the physiological and psychological mechanisms involved, the field of learning is one of the most thoroughly studied in the whole of psychology. Yet at present, it is still not known whether a common set of principles applies to all forms of learning or whether there are several different principles.

Many theories have been advanced over the years to explain why people behave the way they do. As Bandura (1971) noted, until recent years, the popularly accepted view was that behavior was "impelled by inner forces in the form of needs, drives, and impulses, often operating below the level of consciousness." Traditional theories of learning, according to the same authority, have generally shown behavior to be the product of the consequences of directly experienced response, when in actuality "virtually all learning phenomena resulting from direct experiences can occur on a vicarious basis through observation of other people's behavior and its consequences for them. . . ."

Learning, then, can come about (1) through observation which allows the individual to acquire behavioral units of a large and integrated nature without the usual trial-and-error patterned buildup; (2) through cognitive capacity that not only determines bow the individual is affected by his experiences, but also the direction his actions may take in the future by representation of external influences in a symbolic context; and (3) through the capability of creating self-regulative influences by management of stimulus determinants of certain activities and production of consequences for the individual's own respective actions.

T. Gjesme (1971) states it is important to note that motivation is one of the most important keys to learning, according to social learning theory principles. Human beings most often learn when impelled by a need, faced with a problem, or lured by a reward.

Motivation is, in part, a result of how a child perceives his world based on early learning. Extrinsic as well as intrinsic factors--such as interest, meaningfulness, and applicability to life--usually have a great and lasting effect; but the intrinsic factors have an even greater effect, a more lasting one. They also lead to self-motivation, which is generally superior to external motivation.

Until the present, most institutions involved in Indian education have fundamentally revealed their own cultural bias.

According to Gerwitz and Stingle (1968), social learning theory assumes that "the learning of cultural values, among other things, can and does occur by direct experience, through modeling, through regulatory process, through vicarious punishment or positive reinforcement, and through cognitive control." New patterns of behavior are created by organizing sequences of commonly accepted responses into new acceptable patterns of behavior.

Thus, by the time children enter school, they have learned certain patterns of behavior and fairly specific ways of responding to their values and their overall culture system. This learning is the result of non-verbal and of matter-of-fact vocal interaction with one's models. An individual's behavior at this level is in a rudimentary form and is not based on logic or reasoning. The child only knows that certain behavior is 'acceptable, not why. His responses are to please his models thereby receiving positive rewards for himself. One must recognize however, that all behavior is not goal oriented or for the purpose of receiving rewards.

By observing a model of desired behavior, the child will form an idea of how to combine response components to produce new behavioral configurations and according to Bandura (1971) "the representation serves as a guide for behavioral reproduction."

If one considers Piaget's stages of cognitive development, a child does not develop cognitive insight until around 12 years of age. When different values are not explained, or differences noted, the child does not become cognitively aware of these differences. The child is functioning within his existing model and does not understand the expectations of the model of those educating him. Therefore, confusion exists when the child responds from his model and meets with disapproval from those educating him.

Trimble (1976) states, "Admitting that Indian groups are different from non-Indian groups, one asks what values can be listed to distinguish one group from another. Unfortunately, a complete definitive catalogue is not immediately available despite the attempts of certain social scientists to develop one. Their efforts, or the efforts of anyone who would take on the task, would be hampered indeed by the diversity of Indian groups themselves. To begin with, one would have to differentiate between Indians residing in different sectors of the country on reservations, in rural nonreservation communities, in small towns, and in large metropolitan areas. If one manages to make this differentiation, then one must, face the task of differentiating and discriminating among tribal differences. The process of deduction is seemingly endless. . . ."

There are no universal Indian values, neither is there an overall European value system, however, there are values that exist as part of the value systems of Indian tribes in the United States. These values can be likened to the mainstream of a river; many tributaries flow into a river depositing different things, yet it is recognized as the same river. We may study basic values, or underlying concepts, yet must be aware that each tribe has its own identity and may interact differently within its environment than another tribe.

The author in 1975-76 compiled a list of values and value systems that have been identified as being divergent from the dominant Anglo value system. This list was the result of a study completed at Haskell Indian Junior College in 1975 with 200 students. Indian students between the ages of 17-24 from more than 80 tribes participated in the study. The students were asked to list ten values that they considered most important from their particular tribal group. After completion of this list they were then asked to reduce the list to the five most important. After this was completed students were placed in a group. From the various groups a list of the most commonly mentioned values was compiled.

The following values or value systems are those felt to be important to understand in order to utilize Indian values with other value systems in education for the American Indian: (1) Group competition and interpersonal relationships. (2) Religious systems and religious practices. (3) Individual freedom. (4) Position of the elder--a) eye contact, b) avoiding judgment. (5) Formality of time. (6) Generosity and sharing. (7) Honesty.

This study discussed these values attempting to relate how the practice of these values created differences in cultural perspectives between the Indian and non-Indian culture. These values are important to understand when teaching and counseling Indian youth if conflict resolution is the desired end.

Another important consideration is the language of the American Indian. Although not necessarily a value, language does structure thought and attitudes. The type of language used is extremely important to consider. The language of the American Indian is generally not as verbal as the Anglo. The Indian relies more on visual learning to teach. One learns to relate by feeling and seeing. Some tribes will call attention to what they are doing to relate a feeling. It has been suggested that the type of Indian language, whether visually or verbally oriented, can effect acquisition of the English language as stated by Cooley, Vanosdol and Johnson (1976).

The general values that were discussed are but a few. It was impossible to include the multitude of differing values of the American Indian in this abstract. This article deals with the effects of the cultural system of the American Indian and how they can be related and utilized to provide better education and counseling programs for the Indian child. Discussion of the potential of utilizing information contained in this study centered around the use of modeling stimuli.

A major function of modeling stimuli, according to social learning theory, as stated by Bandura (1971), is to transmit information to observers on how to organize component responses.

The Indian child could be given modeling stimuli through mass media, perhaps learning that in his second cultural environment such behavior is held to be of value. Once the Indian child is made cognitively aware that such differences can exist, then this perhaps will show the student what he is doing and the effects it has on others.

By providing Indian children with such information and models, these children would not be forced to accept or assimilate cultural values that were alien to them. Identity problems and confusion common to adolescent years may be reduced.

Social learning theory, as opposed to other learning theory, distinguishes between learning and the performance of matching behavior. In offering children modeling stimuli, social learning theory suggests that a higher level of observational learning will be achieved by informing observers in advance about the payoff value for adopting modeling patterns of behavior than by waiting until observers happen to imitate a model and rewarding them for it. Thus the Indian child, when being provided modeling stimuli should know in advance about the payoff value involved in attempting to model after observed stimuli. As several research studies have shown, induced awareness immediately abolishes conditioned autonomic responses. Merely to imitate competitive behavior, for example, does not allow Indian children to become aware of the different values placed on types of behavior in the second culture. According to social learning theory, conditioned emotional responses are mediated for the most part through thought-produced arousal, as opposed to being directly evoked by stimuli of a conditioned nature.

Such considerations indicate that other learning modalities could be useful as means of introducing Indian school children to Anglo cultural concepts and approaches while still allowing the children to view their own cultural concepts and approaches as valid and valuable. Direct experience might be interpreted to include role-playing sessions, dramatic productions, and even school sponsored visits to non-Indian homes where such are feasible. In such extensions of normal school experience, vicarious reward or punishment and positive reinforcement could be superimposed as conceptual lessons. Basic experience could be further broadened through subsequent class discussion in which regulatory processes and cognitive control are explained in simple terms. Comparisons of Indian and Anglo beliefs and practices could be drawn for the purpose of clarification. This, this writer might add, would benefit not only the Indian child but the other children in the class and would provide better understanding between children.

It was recommended that schools, whether under Anglo or Indian administration, provide modeling stimuli exemplifying both sets of values to Indian children while stressing the set of most importance and worth for adjustment in a future world context. This can be done by teachers of any value system or ethnic group if they are willing to: (1) Seek and use information from the tribal groups with whom they interact; (2) Utilize the elders of the community in the schools, allowing them to teach and demonstrate in their own way; (3) Seek awareness of their own values and how their values effect their teaching; (4) Considering each child as an individual with his or her own needs that can be met in an open caring environment, allowing the student more self-direction.

Above all else, teachers should utilize aspects of social learning theory in their classes. It is not necessary to have a modernistic classroom with the latest teaching devices to do outstanding teaching. What is necessary is that the teacher provide an atmosphere for growth, one that is based on openness, honesty and consideration for the Indian students' value systems.

Recommendations for further research were made as this study hopefully will stimulate research in this field for the purpose of providing an equal and just education for all children.

1. Bandura, A. Social Learning Theory. Morristown, N. J.: General Learning Press, 1971.

2. Bryde, J. F. "A New Approach to Indian Education." Integrated Education 6 (Sept./Oct. 1968): 26-29.

3. Cooley, C. R., A Study of the Value System of Native American Students at Haskell Indian Junior College, Lawrence, Kansas, unpublished study, 1975.

4. Cooley, C. R., B. M. Vanosdol, D. M. Johnson, "A Comparison of English as a Second Language Program and Normal Classroom Instruction with Indian Students in Reading," BIA Educational Research Bulletin, Volume 4, May 1976: 13-26.

5. Gerwitz, J. L., K. G. StingIe, "Learning of Generalized Imitation as the Basis for Identification," Psychological Review 75 (1968): 375-397.

6. Gjesme, T. "Motive To Achieve Success and Motive To Avoid Failure in Relation to School Performance for Pupils of Different Ability Levels," Journal of Educational Research, 15 (1971): 81-99.

7. McKeachie, W. J., C. L. Doyle, Psychology (Second Edition). Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co 1971

8. Ruch, F. L., P. G. Zimbardo, Psychology and Life (Seventh Edition). Chicago: Scott Foresman and Co., 1968.

9 Trimble, J. E., "Value Differences Among American Indians: Concerns for the Concerned Counselor," Counseling Across Cultures, The University Press of Hawaii, 1976: 69-70.