Volume 20 Number 1
October 1980

Brian P. Miller

FOR some years now the community education concept has been growing and developing in the continental United States. A great deal of attention has been given to describing and defining community education as it develops a national prospective.

Historically, little has been done, however, in the area of Indian community education--particularly rural Indian community education. Because multiple and divergent definitions and constructs of community education exist, this study attempts to formulate a generic description of Indian community education.

A 42-item questionnaire was formulated by Dillon Platero, Director of the Indian Community Education Center at the University of New Mexico. It was administered to two Indian populations to compare their views on the priorities of Indian community education. The first sampling took place in May, 1979, in Albuquerque, where some 103 leaders gathered from across the United States to attend the first annual Indian Community Education Conference, sponsored by the University of New Mexico Center for Indian Community Education.

During the course of the conference the participants were asked to complete a questionnaire concerning the needs and priorities of Indian community education. Subsequently a second sampling was taken in Window Rock, Arizona. This sample group was made up of some 55 local community members who were gathered for a one-day training session in community education. The community members were asked to respond to the same questionnaire that had been completed by the National Indian Community Education Leaders. Essentially, the investigator was looking for similarities and discrepancies that might exist between the perceptions of the two groups concerning the items on the questionnaire.

A two-tailed chi square analysis was used to determine if any statistically significant differences exist concerning the perceptions of the two groups with regard to the individual items on the questionnaire.

Some 23 items yielded chi squares significant at the .05 level. In every case they were in the direction of the local group placing a higher value on the item than did the national leaders group.

An overall chi square value averaging the 42 individual scores yielded a score of 7.96 p< .01 indicating a strong tendency throughout the data for a difference clearly beyond probable chance in the perceptions of the two groups.

Those questionnaire items where a statistically significant difference exists between the response of the two groups are:

It is difficult to generalize about these data. One may, however, observe that the concerns and views of national ICE leaders and those of community members often differ concerning what ICE is and what its priorities should be.

Central focus of those items where a significant difference shows up between the responses of the two groups is on issues best described collectively as basic human needs.

Health care, child care, adult and vocational education, water and road services are among those general issues indicating differences. In addition to the concern for services was the need for more self-determination and greater awareness of ecological issues.

Based on these data it seems fair to observe that the major concerns of local Indian community members appear to be concerned more with basic issues than do national leaders.

It stands to reason that national leaders might place a lower value on these items inasmuch as they 1) are daily concerned with matters of national importance as defined and shaped by their daily work environment; and 2) are generally not living in local Indian communities and are therefore, removed from the concerns of those environs.

Because such a strong tendency (>.05) exists toward a difference in the value or importance on the item in 23 cases, some conclusions and implications are offered.

Presumably, the concerns of native Indian leaders are not entirely those of local community members. It could be observed that if successful Indian community education models are to emerge, a closer, clearer understanding of the needs and wants of local community members as to the priorities of ICE needs to be developed. Without such clarification the obvious danger exists that models for ICE will be put in places that have little to do with the needs of the Indian community to be served.