Volume 34 Number 1
Fall 1994

One of the most salient features confronting the new employee on the Navajo Reservation is the frequency with which one experiences periods of silence; this occurs in a group or dyad composed of Navajo people. This phenomena was noted by the majority of "outsiders" (those originating from places off of the reservation) employed on the reservation as permeating a variety of social settings. While most outsiders experienced some degree of discomfort with this silence, Navajos appeared to be quite accustomed to "not speaking."

Many roles (e.g., to the doctor or nurse) lend themselves to circumventing silence when working with American Indian people. However, how does silence impact educators of American Indian children? How is the discomfort of silence addressed? Certainly silence in the classroom necessitates accommodation. This manuscript will focus on the perceptions of educators of American Indian children, and more specifically Navajo children, and how silence effects the school environment.

Research indicates that traditional American Indian groups utilize silence more regularly than other groups (Basso, 1970; Butterfield and Pepper, 1991; Hirst and Slavik, 1989; Hornett, 1990; Luftig, 1983; Mowrer, 1970; Philips, 1976; Plank, 1993; Wieder and Pratt, 1990). While reviewing the literature concerning this topic it became apparent that there really is not a great deal of research committed to silence; Basso (1970) came to the same conclusion. Currently, silence emerges as a category that has not been actively or thoroughly researched with American Indian populations.

Nevertheless, some researchers maintain that silence is a unique classification in the field of communication. "Therefore, silence is interesting to study in its own right. In any ethnography of communication, silence is potentially something of importance" (Braithwaite, 1990, p. 321). Likewise, Samarin (1965) suggests, "Silence can have meaning. Like the zero in mathematics, it is an absence with a function" (p. 115). For the traditional American Indian cultures of North America this is especially true. Hence, if the researcher ignores silence, the researcher will not recognize much of the communication.

What one sees emerging is the concept of silence being a form of communication, it is not merely the lack of speaking. Silence serves a purpose for the non-speaker. As noted in Basso's (1970) "To Give up on Words": "It is not the case that a man who is silent says nothing" (Anonymous).

Hymes (1964) advocates an "ethnography of communication," which requires information concerning the codes, channels, and expressions that communicators utilize in a society. In other words, when one witnesses the silence of American Indian peoples, one may be witnessing communication. However, this communication is simply nonverbal. While this concept may seem simple, many times silence is misinterpreted by persons unfamiliar with American Indian behavior patterns (Basso, 1970).

Basso (1970) and Mowrer (1970) found distinct silence patterns with Western Apaches and Navajos, respectively. Basso (1990) discovered that Western Apaches employ silence because of the specific relationship between the interlocutors. Non-speaking behavior is described in five social contexts when silence is appropriate for the Apache, they are: when meeting strangers, when courting (dating), when children come home from school after an extended stay (e.g., boarding school), when being verbally chastised, when in the presence of someone who is grieving, and when in the presence of someone undergoing a ceremony. Mowrer's (1970) results are similar for Navajos in the Tuba City (Western Agency) region; she found that Navajos use silence in much the same manner and in the same social settings.
In conclusion Basso (1970) posits three main hypotheses.

1. In Western Apache culture, the absence of verbal communication is associated with social situations in which the social status of focal participants is ambiguous.

2. Under these conditions, fixed role expectations lose their applicability and the illusion of predictability in social interaction is lost.

3. To sum up and reiterate; keeping silent among the Western Apache is a response to uncertainty and unpredictability in social relations.

The current author suggests that these hypotheses apply to both Apaches and Navajos, and probably to most traditional American Indian tribes throughout North America.

This manuscript will attempt to provide information concerning Navajo silence in the educational setting: What does silence mean for the educator of Navajo children? A common assertion of the American Indian educators is, "The only poor question is the one that is not asked." As noted in numerous observations by this researcher, the Navajo child is unlikely to ask a question in the classroom. Also, the Navajo child is not apt to answer the question presented by the teacher.

Traditional American Indians often will refuse to answer a question in the classroom because that would be "putting himself above the others" (Wieder and Pratt, 1990). These writers also claim that even when the student knows the correct answer, it is considered improper to verbally respond to the teacher's question. One should not set oneself apart or above one's peers (Youngman & Sadongei, 1974). According to these authors, there are distinct roles prescribed for both the teacher and the student:

Clearly, the authors are claiming that silence is prescribed in the pupils' role. If one refers back to Basso's assertion regarding ambiguous settings, the school setting could easily be defined in these terms. Navajo children are taught how to "learn" in their home environment, though the school requires that they "learn" in a very oppositional direction.

Two possible cultural causes for Navajo children's silence in the classroom are discovered from the literature. First, it is inappropriate to set oneself above or apart from one's peers. Second, the cultural role for the pupil requires listening and watching the teachers-not questioning or answering queries.

Additionally, if the teacher demands answers to questions from American Indian students confusion may be created. According to Basso (1970), when confronted with ambiguous social situations, the traditional American Indian child's proper response is silence. Therefore, while American Indian children may be more reticent than others, the educator's expectations of the children may intensify this behavior.

The literature provides some insight into why American Indian children are quiet in the classroom, but how is this silence interpreted by the teacher. Just as the Navajo child is taught how to learn, the teacher likewise has been instructed into how to teach. Frequently, teachers employed on the Navajo reservation have come from other states and from other regions of the United States (Plank, 1993). This appears to be a national trend; non-American Indians account for two-thirds of the educators of American Indian children (Hornett, 1989).

How does the non-Navajo educator interpret this lack of speech on the part of the Navajo child? The literature suggests that the non-Native teacher often misinterprets silence in the classroom (Dyc, 1993; Mitchum, 1989; Youngman & Sadongei, 1974). However, no research specifically investigated silence in the Navajo children's classroom.

Methodology

The Navajo Reservation is the largest reservation in the country, both in population and land mass. The reservation covers an area approximately the size of West Virginia, and has a population of roughly 200,000 people. This sprawling reservation encompasses high desert and mountains in Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah.

Historically, Navajos were educated through the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) school system. However, one now observes public schools replacing the BIA facilities. Navajo children and families have options concerning where children will attend school, either BIA or public school. The information contained in the present research was obtained from the experience of teachers or counselors working with Navajo children on the Navajo reservation (N=16). Also, for the purpose of this research both BIA and public school employees were interviewed or surveyed. When feasible, personal interviews lasting about 40 minutes were conducted (N=10). While the average may have been 40 minutes, some of the interviews lasted over one and one half hours. All of the interviews were conducted by the same investigator. When a face-to-face meeting was not possible a survey was given or sent to the educator (N=6). The number of teachers may appear to be small, but this is typical in qualitative research. The number of subjects is not as important as the depth of the interview.

The majority of the questions were presented in an open-ended manner. The purpose of this type of question was to gather as many ideas as possible from the educators. In qualitative research, such as this, it is advantageous to allow the interviewee a great deal of latitude in responding. Therefore, the questions were simple and thought provoking. The following is the list of questions presented to the educators:

1. Have you noticed more silence among Navajo children than among other groups of children?
2. If so, what were the circumstances that surrounded the event/events?
3. What were your feelings/reactions to this silence?
4. What do you believe causes American Indian children to be more quiet than other groups of children?
5. What accommodations in the classroom have you made for teaching American Indian children?
6. How well do you believe that you were prepared for working with this population?
7. Would you like to add anything that you have not already mentioned?

All ten interviews were audio-taped and transcribed. Once transcription of interviews was complete, responses could be grouped by themes or categories. These categories will be reported later in this paper.

In summary, the research questions are: (1) do personnel at BIA, contract, and grant schools perceive that they have self-determination and local control, and (2) do persons employed at contract or grant schools report greater self-determination and local control than persons at BIA-administered schools. A discussion follows of the interview and survey findings.

In order to fairly represent the ethnic makeup of the school personnel, a sample of Navajo educators was also collected (N=3). Likewise, Navajo children were to be interviewed for the research. However, this did not materialize properly as planned by the researcher. When questioned about being silent, the Navajo children seemed to be unaware of it: They did not perceive silence as being an issue in the classroom or in social interactions. Likewise, they did not see themselves as "shy" or introverted. Therefore, there is little to report concerning Navajo children's thoughts about how silence impacts the classroom. Navajo children do not appear to be as aware of silence as some of their teachers seem to be.

Additionally, the present study also tried to assess the differences in teachers' versus students' perception of Navajo children. Utilizing a separate teacher population, ten elementary school teachers of Navajo children were selected. These teachers were both Navajo and Caucasian. The data was collected in April (toward the end of the second semester). The teachers were asked to choose ten children in their classroom that they believed had low self-concepts, and five children that had high self-concepts (total N= 100, N=50 high self-concept group, N=50 low self-concept group). The selected students were given the Piers-Harris Self-Concept Scale (1984) for children.

A strong negative (-.78) correlation was detected. In other words, students that teachers selected as having low self-concepts scored high on the scale, while students selected as having high self-concepts scored low. When asked how they selected children for the low self-concept group, teachers commonly noted that these were quiet, shy children who did not frequently talk in class. Clearly there exists a discrepancy between how teachers perceive Navajo children and how Navajo children perceive themselves. Silent or quiet behavior is not an appropriate criteria for judging a Navajo child's self-concept. Likewise, silence appears to be a cultural norm. Navajo children feel fine with silence, it is the teacher who is uncomfortable and uninformed about the use of this behavior.

A Description of the Educators
The sixteen educators in this study were selected from three school districts for this research. One district was selected in the eastern portion, the central portion, and the western portion. School personnel in this research incorporated educators working with both elementary and secondary levels.

The teachers ranged widely in terms of experience from student teacher (N=1) to very experienced teachers (the mean was 10.6 years of experience working with Navajo children). Additionally, several of those surveyed had prior experience with other groups of American Indian children. The average age for teachers in this study was just over 40 years, and the majority (N=12) held a masters degree. Eleven males and five females were enlisted for this study. The sample reasonably represented the male/female and Navajo/non-Navajo demographics of the schools.

Teachers' Responses to Silence

Consistently, without exception, each teacher acknowledged the presence of silence noted in education. However, the meaning attached to this behavior was not uniform. In reference to some of their own personal experiences, many typical responses regarded the lack of small talk (when reading the quotations of educators, the reader should be aware that the quotes were transcribed verbatim from audiotapes and illustrate the grammatical problems of speech when compared with writing):

The majority of the teachers did not view silence as being inherently negative; this was specially true for most of the educators who had been teaching American Indian children for long periods. However, the following remarks were made by a first year teacher on the Navajo Reservation:

Many of those interviewed recalled uneasy experiences when they first began teaching on the reservation:

The preceding statements make clear the feelings and thoughts of unaccustomed teachers on the reservation. They experience varying degrees of culture-shock. The majority of teachers report some degree of difficulty in adjusting to the lack of verbal communication from student to teacher. Further, how does the educator react when accustomed strategies do not produce the expected results?

Teacher Interpretations of Navajo Children's Silence
Responses concerning what silence meant for the Navajo child varied widely. While all of the teachers stated that they recognized the existence of silence, and that they witnessed its impact in the classroom, approximately 50% of them had no notion of what silence means. Other teachers held strong views about what silence meant in the classroom, among the explanations presented by the teachers were four distinct categories most frequently mentioned.

1. The Student's Perception of Education
   The first area to be expounded upon will be Navajo children's goal in education. Certain educators in this study believe that Navajo children do not value education as highly as non-Navajo children do. The following statements exemplify this:

   Silence now for Navajo students means a number of things. Some really don't know or understand, but are either unwilling or unable to state they don't know. Others simply use silence as a ploy to appear dumb so they won't have to expend much energy. Many times students are simply passed from one grade to another without having to do much, if any, work, and the downward spiral continues. Getting by with a "D" is sufficient since the ultimate goal is a piece of paper which is called a high school diploma (Educator 11, 11/30/93).

   I don't think it is simply a pattern of communication. I think we have values and a way of doing things that are all conflicting here. It becomes an identifiable classroom behavior. They don't care about classroom performance the way we think they should. They're not going to respond the way we want them to. If they don't value education the way we do, then they have plenty of reason to be quiet. So it just may be a lack of respect or lack of wanting an education as we know it. As we have been taught to teach it. It goes beyond people's problems with reticence and shyness. The loud kids in class are usually the better students by the Anglo paradigm (Educator 5, 11/14/93).

   The feeling that I get is there is an attitude that says, 'OK, my parents didn't like the previous generation of non-Indians that were here and because they didn't like them and they didn't participate I'm not going to participate.' They (the students) have a real problem with Anglo teachers. Some of the students have a problem with Anglo teachers being here, but that problem came from their parents. They only come to class if they want to (Educator 2, 11/15/93).

   
   
2. Cultural Difference
   Silence was frequently associated with cultural differences even if the teacher was unfamiliar of the specific, cultural cause. Some teachers were very sensitive to cultural causes of behavior while others were not. The following are some of their comments made specifically about culture:

   I don't think it is anything they do personally, I think they do it unthinkingly. I think it's the way they have been brought up that you don't speak unless you have something to say and I think more so with elders and stuff like that. People in authority positions, it's kind of like the way we were brought up, you don't talk back to policemen. They just don't talk to authority figures unless they have something to say (Educator 6, 11/16/93).

   I think their culture is the biggest part of it. Maybe they think it is rude or maybe they somehow don't think it's right. They're taught in the home not to be singled out in a competitive nature. I interpret it mostly as their form of respect. I think respect for their fellow student, the person that is in the class but they are not trying to outdo anyone. I think they are timid and bashful. Maybe in front of their grandparents and in front of their parents they're not supposed to be speaking up and yelling out things. They're supposed to have respect in front of adults and let the adult do the talking. You know they have a lot of respect for the older people. It's a lot different than our culture (Educator 7, 11/22/93).

   Interestingly, the teachers cited above received no formal training in order to develop their ideas. However, their thoughts are not greatly different from how the Navajo teachers interpret silence. The Navajo teachers often paired the classroom silence to cultural factors:

   In the Indian way, you listen first and give opinions when it is the right time. I think the Navajo child is respectful of their elders (teachers included) and are well-behaved (Educator 12, 11/29/93).

   This has been true, but as time goes by they get to know you better and are able to express themselves. I see it in my class (Educator 14, 11/29/93).

   It was believed that we shouldn't freely give out our knowledge to strangers. They might gain all of your knowledge and that person will lose his/her power. They only speak when they are spoken to, they have respect for their elders and are more attentive (Educator 13, 11/26/93).

   
   
3. Language and Speech Factors
   Most of the teachers believed that the influence of speech and language effected verbal activity. Many teachers mentioned that Navajo children process information differently; and further, that language differences were at least partly responsible for this. While the responses varied, there existed a common theme in their explanations:

   They are silent because they are thinking and processing the thought many times for what to say (Educator 12, 11/26/93).

   If nothing else even if they understand it they're going to have to take time to understand the words and make sure that they are understanding them correctly. I think that's hard for us to interpret unless we have put ourselves in that position by taking other languages classes. Maybe you'd be frustrated by being asked questions in a different language. We might all hesitate a little bit. You have to plan in patience and be willing to wait a little longer (Educator 6, 11/16/93).

   They need time to think and try to interpret into their own language. They're a little scared and shy and don't have the communication skills, so they are more silent (Educator 13, 11/26/93).

   For kids fluent in Navajo and were raised traditionally need extra time to think, so they can think back in English. So it's going to take them longer to think in their first language and to express the answer in their second language. You're going to have to give them more time to think about it and figure out how to translate it. Sometimes it is just too frustrating to go through this whole process so they just don't give an answer; they just don't speak at all (Educator 8, 11/24/93).

   These answers were gathered by both Navajo and non-Navajo teachers, yet they reflect similar insights into the issue. Speaking in a second language might slow the communication process down. However, this could depend heavily upon the degree of bilingualism.
   
   

4. Visual Versus Auditory Learning
   Four teachers mentioned the fact that Navajo children seemed to learn information visually rather than through auditory presentations. Therefore, it was assumed by this researcher that visual learning techniques were an important tool for some of the educators working with this population. The replies surrounding visual learning are exemplified in the following:

   Because most of them are visual learners and that's how they've been taught, by watching other people do things. Some are auditory learners and they have to hear, but most aren't. I'm not really sure why they are like that, other than maybe they learned it in the home, especially if they grew up in a traditional home (Educator 8, 11/24/93).

   A lot of time (in their culture) is spent looking around, watching, seeing. So a lot of it is just looking and seeing, observing, looking around, looking for signs, looking for coyotes. Their whole big thing is keeping their eyes peeled, watching, I think being very acute to what's going on. It's a matter of what they are tuned into (Educator 4, 11/15/93).

   It seems most American Indians learn from observing than by asking questions and receiving information. It seems most American Indians learn when their elders decide it is time to show/demonstrate something to children. It seems this may be part of the pattern in current education, but I believe this is not the total reason for contemporary silence in the classroom (Educator 11, 11/30/93).

   The next comment is similar to the preceding ones, but is inclusive of more than just visual learning:

   Navajo children communicate making use of a wider variety of senses than children I have taught from other cultures. A gesture like pointing the lips might replace words such as "over there" (Educator 15, 11/8/93).

Accommodation of Silence in the Classroom
Non-Navajo teachers have reported disappointment in the lack of Navajo stu­dent's academic achievement (Plank, 1993). Throughout the reservation, Navajo children consistently possess some of the lowest academic achievement scores and highest drop-out rates in the United States. Consequently, an important point arises regarding how teachers adjust for silence. How does the educator of Amer­ican Indian children access what the child knows?

How does the teacher of the Navajo child compensate for the lack of speech in the classroom? The responses varied from nothing (no alteration in teaching style) to some very innovative and thought provoking strategies. It is noteworthy that the non-Navajo educators are the ones who appeared to develop alternative teaching approaches. Navajo educators did not view silence as an obstacle as regularly as outsiders; hence, there was little to accommodate for.

1. Experience Working with Navajo Children
   There were two classifications of answers that appeared repeatedly and are worthy of noting, the first concerns the length of time the teacher has been at the particular school site. Educators often felt that the longer they were at the school the more verbal the students became:

   Even with the first year teacher out here, a lot of kids won't talk because they are just trying to figure you out so they are just going to sit back and watch and listen. The second year you are here you can tell a big differ­ence, now they feel a little more comfortable with you and they aren't afraid you'll be skipping out after the first nine weeks (Educator 3, 11/15/93).

   Just give them time to get to know you. They aren't as quiet after you get to know them, maybe a year or so-then they are not so quiet. But still the ones from the more traditional areas are still more quiet, more hesitant, it is harder to get them involved in things, discussions (Educator 8, 11/24).

   I think to a degree the reputation that I've got. I have had their brothers, sisters, cousins (previously in class), so they may have heard of me before, that may help (Educator 6, 11/16/93).

   If there are older kids, then they will hold off until they get to know me better before they talk (Educator 12, 11/26/93).

   The increased tenure of teachers' stay on the reservation may reduce the social ambiguity discussed earlier in this manuscript. Hence, the longer the edu­cator stays at the school, the more verbal the American Indian child may become.

2. Cooperative Learning
   Another area that stimulated some discussion surrounded cooperative rather than competitive learning. These teachers believe firmly that Navajo children react more positively to a cooperative learning environment. Examples of their comments were:

   In a group setting, unless I know the kids very well, I will not ask a ques­tion to an individual. This is too embarrassing for them, too direct. I will let them work on things as a group and come up with a group answer. They will interact and speak to each other much more readily than they will directly to me (Educator 10, 11/26/93).

   Traditional methods like paper and pencil things don't promote verbal skills. A lot of teachers in my school don't really let the kids talk, they may put kids in small groups, but they don't let them speak, they pretty much do paper and pencils skills. These teachers call these cooperative groups, but they aren't really cooperative group activities, they are doing what they would in a traditional classroom, just in groups of three-they are not interacting. Most teachers learned this way themselves. This seems to go for both Anglo and Navajo teachers; they don't seem to know how to use cooperative learning. With me, the children have to talk things over with each other. There's a lot of interaction between peers and doesn't involve the teacher so much (Educator 8, 11/24/93).

   It seems to be when they are in a big group they're very uptight about being singled out. If you put them in a group of two or three they'll talk, there's no doubt about it, it works very, very well. Cooperative learning has been emphasized over competitive learning in the U.S. for the last ten years. On the reservation it doesn't seem like the teachers have been inserviced enough or are coming out of colleges that don't teach it. They (teachers) don't seem to have the latest techniques in teaching anything. They do the old fashion lecture to the kids. When I'd walk around and see what teachers were doing I was noticing that people were having kids in rows, the old fashioned rows and they lecture and kids falling asleep on the desks. Either that or the teacher was doing nothing and the kids were filling in worksheets. There were a handful of teachers that seemed to include good teaching methods and cared about keeping up with the latest techniques (Educator 7, 11/22/93).

   The idea is for them to learn. If they can learn it from somebody else in the room, I am still getting my job done. I can't sit and assume that the only one they are going to learn from is me. Cause if that's the case, we really are restricting education (Educator 6, 11/16/93).

   
   
3. Miscellaneous Methods of Accommodation or Strategies
   There were several comments made by teachers that failed to fall neatly into any discrete category, they were mentioned by only one or two teachers. However, some of these ideas are well worth mentioning. A sampling of these answers are:

   I simply worked a lot with (their) opinions. I'd ask, "How do you feel about this?" Pretty much stressing the fact that there was no wrong answer as long as you can give me a reason for it. So I think they felt better with that (Educator 3, 11/15/93).

   They appreciate one on one, concrete activity, give them something to do, with an identifiable result that your looking for and then they're willing to participate. It's easier to teach if you are not teaching so much as you are kind of coaching or learning together (Educator 5, 11/14/93).

   Instead of trying to call on a specific person to answer a question or whatever, when I'm working on the board instead of turning and facing the class, just leave my back to them, that's a security thing, that some people when they first get out here would have trouble with. Eye contact can be a fear thing. Cause then they feel that you are seeking them out, which culturally is not the way and it seems that it dummies them up a lot quicker (Educator 6, 11/16/93).

   They don't like answering in front of a group, they don't want to be singled out, not in anything, not in dress, the way they look, the way they talk, anything. So this is just another area they don't want to be singled out in. I noticed that they took notes, but wouldn't ask questions. So what I had them do was to write a question down on paper and hand it in. The next day I would answer the questions and nobody knew who had asked it, it worked very well. Also, I emphasized how good the questions were, pretty soon they were real comfortable and started writing lots of questions. Sometimes I would purposely make a break in the lecture, have them answer a question in their notebooks and while they were answering the question, I would look at their questions and make notes, then I could answer the question before they even left that day. Everybody's questions got answered and they began to trust me, I never embarrassed anybody (Educator 7, 11/22/93).

   I give the children adequate response time to questions I might pose in class. I think I give the children situations where they would be comfortable and safe using oral communication skills. I also tried to use a variety of the five senses in many of my lessons so I could observe how the children progressed through non-verbal as well as verbal activities (Educator 15, 11/8/93).

   I learned not to emphasize the importance of speech communication, but rather to encourage writing and art communication (Educator 16, 11/8/93).

All of the Navajo teachers felt that the ability to communicate both in English and in Navajo was of great benefit for them; they believed that if the children failed to respond in English the teacher could always rephrase the question in Diné (the Navajo language). They also felt that the children were sometimes more comfortable replying in Diné rather than English.

Noteworthy in this discussion is the topic of nonverbal communication. As mentioned in certain quotes above, forms of communication other than verbal questioning may be more productive and appropriate with Navajo children. This may be particularly true when working with traditional American Indians. One must question the necessity for the traditional student to learn communication skills that they will not use upon completion of high school. They may need these skills only if they intend to leave the reservation, while on the reservation they are well adapted to social norms.

While some educators devised specific methods by which to adapt to the silence in the classroom, others did not. None of the districts from which these teachers were employed provided any inservicing or orientation for staff concerning the education of American Indian children! Educators of Navajo children are walking into the classroom without knowledge of cultural and psychological differences. Many professions require that their members be sensitized in cultural differences prior to working with another culture. The process currently being utilized by these school districts appears to be insensitive to teachers and to the children they serve; teachers are left to their own resources. A percentage of teachers may adjust to this environment, others cannot and should not even be expected to. Some teachers noted the lack of administrative awareness and support:

This unfortunate situation has been discussed in previous research (Plank, 1993). To the teachers' credit, most made adjustments that were very helpful. However, cultural awareness is too vital an aspect of American Indian life for administrators to ignore. Hirst and Slavik (1989) report from their research with American Indians:

Several pieces of research strongly state the need to approach American Indian education from a cooperative educational posture rather than competitively (Butterfield and Pepper, 1991; Dubray, 1985; Dyc, 1993; Hirst and Slavik, 1989; Mitchum, 1989). Teachers in the current research varied greatly in whether or not they followed this advice.

Some teachers mentioned the delayed responses of the Navajo students, and this idea is supported by research (Butterfield and Pepper, 1991; Dyc, 1993; Hornett, 1990; Mohawk, 1985). The preceding writers advocate allowing ample time-lapse in order for the American Indian student to formulate a response. In a classroom of Anglo children the time elapsed for a response may be a few seconds; for the American Indian student it may be 15-30 seconds. This may feel like an eternity to the uninitiated teacher on the reservation.

Likewise, teachers attributing silence to language processing and second language difficulties find agreement in the research (Butterfield and Pepper, 1991; Mohawk, 1985). Language processing requires more time when a second language is involved.

Literature also suggests that American Indian children are primarily visual learners, but also learn from multiple sensory presentations (kinesthetic, auditory, visual) (Hirst and Slavik, 1989). Some of the teachers noted this pattern of learning. This same research reveals that American Indian students are accustomed to learning from silent observation in the home. Therefore, the teacher is advised to utilize Madeline Hunter's guided practice as an alternate approach in the classroom. Using this style the student is encouraged to participate and try the activity independently while the teacher observes close by,

Certain educators, interviewed in the current study, mentioned creating relevant material for the Navajo child. They accomplished this through numerous strategies (cited above). Further, some literature endorses the concept of culturally based curriculae (Butterfield and Pepper, 1991; Emerson, 1987; Hornett, 1990; Luftig, 1983).

Other considerations that are found to be noteworthy in the literature regarding the education of American Indian children include the following; allowing the student to remain anonymous (not singling him out); maintaining the child's need to be submissive in the class; recognizing the lack of desire to get ahead of peers; the valuing of harmony and consensus with others; and stressing present needs over future ones.

Suggestions for Future Directions
Many school districts' current procedure of placing new teachers, without inservicing, into the American Indian classroom is not simply unconscionable for the beginning teacher, it has a direct impact upon the entire educational experience; studies indicate that this adversely affects the education of American Indian children (Plank, 1993). Further, the lack of inservicing may be a contributor to the high teacher turnover rate on the Navajo Reservation.

Unless school districts are willing to change current hiring and inservicing practices, there is meager hope for the improvement of American Indian education. Achievement scores and high school graduation rates for American Indian students attest to the failure of the present process; they are among the lowest in the nation. Further, there is a large body of research suggesting that American Indian children possess low self-concepts (Lefley, 1974; Long and Hamlin, 1988; Luftig, 1983; Martin, 1977; Mitchum, 1989; Plank, 199 1). Most of these same studies indicate that the school setting is partially responsible for the low self-concept findings. Further, there exists a strong correlation between self-concept and school achievement (Heyman, 1990, Holly, 1987; Purkey, 1970; Rampaul, Singh, and Didyk, 1984; Trent, 1986). The current author does not believe that American Indian education should maintain the status quo. Changes are required in order to affect positive change.

Therefore, three strong recommendations are suggested from both the present manuscript and previous literature: First, an active recruitment of prospective teachers genuinely interested in American Indian education should be incorporated by the school districts. Second, a comprehensive, consistent orientation of all school personnel preparing to educate American Indian children should be a prerequisite to stepping into the classroom. The districts could provide teachers with the literature cited in this manuscript; this information could be valuable for them. And last, support and strategies for beginning teachers should be accessed through more experienced teachers via a mentoring-style format.

One qualifying remark is advised regarding orientation or inservicing of prospective teachers of American Indian children. Each American Indian tribe possesses its own unique identity, any orientation or inservicing should be specifically tailor-made for each tribe. While there exist certain global American Indian traits that tribes/nations share, there are other characteristics that are particular to individual tribes. Therefore, any program designed to initiate educators with culturally appropriate instructive methods needs to be sensitive these distinctive tribal features.

The current writer recognizes that the recommendations proffered above would be more time consuming than the current practices. However, American Indian education can no longer afford these misguided practices. If improvements are to be made, changes are in order. The type of recommendations made in this manuscript require administrative, district-wide alterations.