Peggy Roupe and John W. Tippeconnic III

The development of leaders is a national priority. The lack of effective leaders in all phases of American life has been identified through major communication networks including television news reports, journal articles, and newspapers. Political, religious, educational, and industrial leadership are but a few of the examples of required leadership noted.

The importance of Indian leadership was identified in a recent publication (Charleston, Gorospe, McDonald, & Wolf, 1985):

Without adequate leadership, the special needs of Indians will not be met.

The need to develop suitable leaders requires schools to stress the concept of leadership at an early stage in the education of youth. Leadership education as a curriculum thrust in school allows youth to develop skills to fill leadership roles in our society (Richardson & Feldhusen, 1984).

Elementary and secondary schools have always contributed toward developing the attitudes, knowledge, and skills necessary for leaders (Hillman & Smith, 1981). Although schools continue to assume responsibility for building leaders, they often fail to consider differing perceptions of leadership when planning curriculum content, materials, or methods. For example, culture may play a role in the development of leadership perceptions. Many Indian cultures have some common social characteristics that may influence perceptions of leadership. As a consequence, the conventional view of leadership today in schools may differ significantly from concepts prevalently held by American Indian students. If, in fact, perceptions vary culturally, there are important implications for educational practice in the Indian community. For example, the progress of certain American Indian children in school may be encouraged or impeded through their leadership assumptions. To the extent cultural differences in perceptions of leadership exist, educators must become knowledgeable concerning the differences and take them into consideration in instructional planning.

Survival of Indian tribes today depends upon trained leaders to assume vital roles in all fields. Schools are traditionally expected to provide this opportunity for training. However, Indian students' achievement in school is considered below that of non-Indians (Echo Hawk & Parsons, 1977). Educational leadership at these traditional institutions often does not reflect tribal values. Thus, education at these conventional schools may contribute to actual or perceived value discrepancies. To the extent these discrepancies influence leadership perceptions, children's progress in school may be encouraged or hindered. Efforts to establish the leadership criteria needed for inclusion in their educational programs could be of benefit in making the school experience of the American Indian more successful.

American Indian and non-Indian junior high school students were asked to rank leadership characteristics in order of greatest importance. In order to control for the variable of urbanization (the degree to which living in an urban or rural community relates to one's values) comparisons were made between urban and rural students.

Sample. Participants in this study were selected from four school sites, two urban and two rural. Each school was located within 20 miles of the greater Phoenix, Arizona, metropolitan area. The number of participants and schools were:

1. Forty-six 7th- and 8th-grade students at a rural American Indian school.

2. Forty-eight 7th- and 8th-grade students at a rural non-Indian school.

3. Thirty 7th-, 8th-, and 9th-grade students at an urban American Indian school.

4. Fifty 8th- and 9th-grade students at an urban non-Indian school.

Instrumentation. Since no suitable leadership perception instrument was available, an instrument, including a questionnaire, was developed, validated, field tested, and administered at the four different junior high schools. In the development of the instrument individual leadership traits were clustered under the following six descriptors: (a) physical characteristics, (b) social background, (c) intelligence and ability, (d) personality, (e) task-oriented characteristics, (e) social characteristics.

Statistical procedures. Spearman's rho correlation coefficient, as outlined by Minium (1978), was employed to test the first six major hypotheses by correlating the mean pupil perception scores for each of the following groups:

In order to substantiate the ranked responses of subjects, open-ended questions pertaining to the topic of leadership were submitted to the same group of students. It was determined that a less-structured format would give greater meaning to statistically based rankings so far described in the study.

The chi-square statistic was used to determine whether the four school types differed with regard to the following six clusters: (a) physical characteristics, (b) social background, (c) intelligence and ability, (d) personality, (e) task-related characteristics, and (f) social characteristics. Acceptance or rejection of the null hypothesis was made at the .05 level.

Demographic data pertaining to the students in the study were also placed in tables.

When the statistical analyses were completed, it was necessary to reject each of the negatively stated correlational hypotheses. Table 1 shows the Spearman rho correlations by school type. By referring to this table it may be noted that the correlation between the rural American Indian and urban non-Indian students was the least (rho = .67). The greatest correlation was between rural and urban non-Indian students (rho = .90). A similar correlation (rho = .80) was obtained between rural American Indians and rural non-Indians and urban Indian students. A similar correlation (rho = .72) was also obtained between the perceptions of the urban American Indians and those of the rural and urban non-Inians. The leadership perceptions of the students in the study were highly related. The findings also failed to demonstrate that school site had a bearing upon how the junior high school students responded to the traits included in the six clusters.

TABLE 1
Spearman Rho Correlations by School Type

Table 2 shows the traits on which the rank order varied six or more points between school types.

While each of the correlational hypotheses was rejected, variations between the derived correlations were attributable to responses on specific questionnaire items. As might have been expected, the lowest of the six correlations derived in the study was between rural American Indians and urban non-Indians (rho = .67). Although this moderately high correlation did not allow for acceptance of the correlational hypotheses, notable differences were identified between rankings of these two groups. The items where the greatest dispersion existed included:

The non-Indian students ranked the following traits at least six ranking positions higher:

When this study was contemplated, it was felt that differences would be found between the leadership perceptions of American Indian youth and those of the dominant non-Indian group. However, the findings of the study indicate that the leadership perceptions of both the American Indian and non-Indian junior high school students were very similar. This section is included for the purposes of examining possible reasons for the similarity in leadership perceptions and for determining avenues for future research on this topic. For ease in considering these purposes, the discussion will be organized around the following topics: (a) socialization, (b) acculturation, (c) cognitive development of students, and (d) instrumentation.

Socialization. Schools are socially approved institutions with the responsibility of assisting youngsters in becoming more competent citizens. These institutions promote a social, political and economic ideology quickly translated to the children who are their products. It is through education that children become participating members of society. However, educators can direct educational programs to fit general social needs without regard for the needs of special groups of children.

Groups that have economic resources stable enough to afford the luxury of maintaining and developing educational institutions often define the social, political, and economic ideology inherent within the school system. Conversely, groups that lack regular access to economic resources simply cannot afford to send their children to private schools and, therefore, must send their children to the available schools. The available public education program reinforces the sociocultural system of the American middle class. Criticism of American public education was forcefully stated in the following by McDavid:

American Indian children, whose cultural backgrounds differ considerably, are subjected to the socialization practices of American public educational institutions by virtue of their attendance within these institutions, even though American Indians may view the educational needs of their children differently from members of the white middle class.

The American Indian students utilized in this study were at the junior high school level of educational attainment. These students had spent 7, 8, or 9 years in schools that reflected the political, social, and economic ideologies of the American middle class. Through the first eight grades, the same state courses of study were required for both Indian and non-Indian students. Thus, leadership concepts may already have been inculcated during the socialization process, contributing to the similarities found among the four groups.

This study utilized the school setting. Due to their socialization, students may have responded to the questionnaire items in accordance with their interpretation of what the researcher wanted without interjecting ideas of their own. Future studies of this type should attempt to control the setting. Allowances should be made for accomplishing future research studies within the community rather than school setting. Perhaps the less formal environment would allow for greater freedom in responding to the items.

Many of the Indian students utilized in this study did not speak their native language. Being able to speak one's native language would cause American Indian students to become more involved in the cultural affairs of the tribe and more conversant with the tribe's leadership values. Therefore, a study could be made comparing the leadership perceptions of a sample of American Indian students, who are adept at conversing in their native language, with a sample of non-Indian students who speak only English.

Acculturation. Through control of the nation's resources and American institutions, the dominant cultural form has more or less been a mechanism for integrating and acculturating ethnic minorities. Some ethnic groups have been successfully integrated, while others have steadfastly maintained their ethnic identities. The rate and degree of acculturation has differed among groups and even among families associated within groups. There are over 250 American Indian tribes. Each entity may be viewed as a distinct political, cultural, and social group often having its own language and value system. In the same vein, acculturation has been accomplished quickly for some and slowly for others.

Numerous laws and policies that slowed or accelerated acculturation were enacted by the federal government. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 tended to slow the acculturation process. The removal and relocation of eastern Indians to reservations in the West tended to slow acculturation. However, the isolation tactics failed to prevent contact with the mainstream American group by American Indians, and it became necessary to adopt new policies toward elimination of the Indian problem.

Since extermination seemed inhuman, new policies and laws were directed toward acculturation and integration of the American Indian. For example, the General Allotment Act, or Dawes Act, of 1887 authorized the allotment of 160 or 180 acres of reservation land to individual tribal members. Consequently, it broke up the land base and many of the tribes. Through this one piece of legislation, federal officials believed they could solve the Indian problem in one generation. Other laws were also passed during this period to encourage rapid integration. Congress passed the Major Crimes Act in 1885, which gave criminal jurisdiction to the federal government over major felonies committed in Indian country. Such offenses were previously considered to be under jurisdiction of Indian tribes. Additionally, the Indian Citizenship Bill, passed in 1924, gave Indians the right to vote (Deloria & Lytle, 1983).

The federal policy of integration was further reflected in the Johnson O'Malley Act (JOM) of April 16, 1934. JOM encouraged the states and local school districts to assume the responsibilities for Indian education by providing financial assistance. During the Termination Period of the 1950s, Congress enacted two additional impact aid laws, Public Law 81-874 and Public Law 81-815, for similar purposes. These two laws encouraged public school attendance of American Indian children by providing federal subsidies to public schools for children whose parents lived or worked on federal tax-exempt properties. The Self Determination Period was inaugurated in the 1960s and has continued to the present. In the Self Determination program, the trend toward integration was continued, but a greater reliance was placed on the local Indian tribes for the operation of schools.

The rate and degree of acculturation varied among tribal groups and individuals. Two factors that influenced acceptance or rejection of integration policies included where and how the American Indian people lived. Living on an isolated Indian reservation and adhering to traditional cultural values and beliefs tended to impede the acculturation process. This point was made by Ramirez III and Castanada (1974) when they discussed the degree of acculturation of Mexican Americans:

It appears the degree of contact between cultural groups is influential in determining the degree of integration or acculturation.

A total of 174 junior high school students from urban and rural sites within the greater Phoenix metropolitan area participated in this study. All of the American Indian students in this study lived on reservations that were located close to the greater Phoenix metropolitan area. The rural American Indian reservation was situated approximately 20 miles from the Chandler Heights area near Chandler, Arizona, while the urban American Indian reservation bordered the Mesa and Scottsdale, Arizona, area. As a consequence, none of the rural students lived at a distance greater than 20 miles from the metropolitan Phoenix urban area. With only a few miles separating these students from one another, each group of students had access to such similar environmental influences as radio and television stations and comparable newspapers. Students from the different schools were involved in similar athletic contests and other student activities. If the rural areas had been more isolated, it is possible that the correlations between the perceptions of these groups would have been considerably lower, and the seventh hypothesis might have been rejected. The fact that Indian and non-Indian students were not isolated a considerable distance one from another would allow for the continued interchange of ideas on leadership characteristics.

Living in close proximity to a metropolitan area provides the opportunity to exchange ideas and interact with persons from varying cultures and backgrounds. This interaction and exchange of ideas may influence leadership perceptions. A comparative study could be made to determine if junior high school American Indian and non-Indian students living a considerable distance from a metropolitan area would have leadership perceptions different from those of the students in this study.

Cognitive development of students. Junior high school students are usually thought of as beginning the adolescent stage of development. This stage involves many changes in physical and cognitive development.

According to Piaget, the earlier development of middle childhood enables students to begin to cope with the challenges of home and school and to use logical reasoning based only upon concrete objects (cited in Brophy, 1977).

As the child moves away from the concrete operations stage, changes occur that allow adolescents to understand highly abstract materials and to utilize them in thinking and problem solving.

Students who have developed formal operational thought are capable of dealing with concepts in areas such as mathematics, logic, and moral and political philosophy and are able to see contradictions in beliefs previously accepted without question. The age at which this operational development occurs varies but is likely to be achieved at about 12 years or so, if it is achieved at all (Brophy, 1977). The American Indian culture may extend the concrete stage for a longer period than the culture of the non-Indian. The American Indian Education Handbook Committee (1982) indicated that most American Indians are pragmatic and tend to speak in terms of the concrete rather than the abstract. As a consequence, Indian students of 10 learn more rapidly by showing concrete examples first and discussing the abstract afterwards.

The junior high students in this study varied in age from 11 to 15. The rural and urban Indian groups sampled contained 213 students age 12 or younger, while all of the non-Indian students were 13 years of age or older. Of the 70 Indian students, 47 were aged 11 to 13. When the ages of the students are taken into consideration, it appears possible the ability to perform formal operations was not sufficiently developed in the Indian students in order to allow them to adequately respond to the leadership questionnaire. Future studies should attempt to control the age level and consider whether or not the development of formal operations has sufficiently taken place. Another study might be made to determine if American Indian leadership perceptions were more concrete or abstract than the leadership perceptions of the non-Indians.

Instrumentation. Since no instrument was readily available for use, to a considerable extent the data compiled on leadership traits by Stogdill (as cited in Bass, 1981) were used in the development of the instrument utilized in this study. Stogdill surveyed the results of 163 leadership perception studies and indicated that certain of the traits included in those studies could accurately differentiate between leaders and followers. None of the studies were based on American Indian values. Twenty-five of the traits were used in this study.

The results obtained through the use of the instrument suggest the possibility that all of the traits listed stemmed from leadership traits found in the typical American community. The 163 studies were primarily indications of mainstream American beliefs about what constitutes leadership. Thus, the instrument may not have been sensitive enough to concepts about what constitutes Indian leadership. This concern leads to the recommendation of another research project that would make use of an instrument more sensitive to the leadership concepts of American Indians. In the development of the new instrument, viable leadership traits would be obtained from leaders of various American Indian tribes. The rating scales used in the instrument would rely heavily on the traits indicated by the Indian leaders.

A negative correlation was hypothesized between the leadership perceptions of American Indian and non-Indian junior high school students. Certainly this was not the case in this study, as all the urban and rural American Indian and non-Indian subgroups' leadership perceptions were found to be similar.

In view of the fact that the belief remains that differences in leadership perceptions exist, it is recommended that further studies that would attempt to verify this point of view be conducted. Such studies would utilize different sample groups and modified instruments.

American Indian Education Handbook Committee. (1982). American Indian education handbook. Sacramento: California State Department of Education.

Bass, B. M. (1981). Stogdill’s handbook of leadership (rev. ed.). New York: Macmillan.

Brophy, J. E. (1977). Child development and socialization. Chicago: Science Research Associates, Inc.

Charleston, G., Gorospe, L., McDonald, R., & Wolf, D. (1985). Indian educational leadership. In R. Robbins & J. Tippeconnic (Eds.), Indian Educational Leadership. Tempe: Arizona State University, Center for Indian Education.

Deloria, V., Jr., & Lytle, C. M. (1983). American Indians, American justice. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Echo Hawk, M., & Parsons, O. A. (1977). Leadership versus behavioral problems and belief in personal control among American Indians. Social Work of Social Psychology, 102(l), 47-54.

Hillman, S., & Smith, G. (1981). Development of leadership capacities in children. Elementary School Journal, 82(l), 58-65.

Minium, E. W. (1978). Statistical reasoning in psychology and education (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Ramirez, M., III, & Castanada, A. (1974). Cultural democracy, biocognitive development, and education. New York: Academic Press.

Richardson, W. B., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1984). Leadership education: Developing skills for youth. West Lafayette, IN: William Richardson Enterprises.