Native Teacher Understanding of Culture as a Concept for Curricular Inclusion

Introduction

Native culture is rapidly changing in the United States. As a result, the loss of language and culture is emerging as a primary concern in indigenous communities throughout the world today. The change or loss as it is described by many educators is potentially permanent and detrimental to the future and diversity of Native people. The changes manifest where tribes are no longer able to pass on traditions to the younger generation, who are the ones to preserve the heritage. Elders already express the loss of traditional ways of knowing, customs, values, rituals, religion, and other traditions historically passed on to their children. The ongoing, prevalent change has become a concern for all Native educators and leaders in the United States.

While change over time is inevitable in any culture, the colonial processes—destruction of lands and wildlife, genocidal extermination, subjugation, alienation and destruction of the family unit, forced relocation, assimilation, and termination—amount to an invasion that has resulted in loss of language and culture.1 Along with the long history of experiments and assimilation by the U.S. federal government, efforts have repeatedly failed to make the Indian like the mainstream.2 Nevertheless, by the same standard of "Kill the Indian, save the man," the pressure to assimilate Native people into mainstream culture has gradually evolved into success in other ways.3 [End Page 35]

Formal schooling in the Western tradition, according to many scholars, has been a successful, major weapon of colonialism and assimilation.4 Early experiments to educate Indian children by removing them from their families, culture, and original environment may have been deemed failures, but the latent effect of the experiments is evident today. In public schools, where the majority of Native children are educated, research shows they are more likely to remain academically behind other ethnic and racial groups of children. Research also shows that, when compared to other groups, Native children and adults have higher rates of being lured into antisocial behavior like drug use and crime, because of social and economic conditions on reservations.5

The experiments with Indian children and the attempts to acculturate them are manifested in society today at numerous levels. Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court John Marshall's original concept of Native nations as dependent domestic nations made a clear distinction between American Indians and the United States as two nations in a nation-to-nation relationship. Decisions subsequent to this 1831 ruling reveal an obvious redefining of this relationship, commonly referred to as sovereignty by many tribal nations. Sociologists and linguists concur that such assimilative policies together have caused the current endangered state of Native languages. In addition, researchers and demographers note Native families' migration from reservation lands to major cities. Yet, at the same time, there is evidence that the social and economic challenges that serve as racist barriers to Native peoples' success in the mainstream are diminishing, and many are succeeding in business and in the political arena.6

It can be argued that changes in Indian country have double-edged consequences: that Native language and culture have diminished and that changes such as past assimilation policies have prepared Native people for success in the mainstream. Indian tribes continue to undergo internal social, economic, and cultural changes that are deemed a "loss" by elders. But many tribes have endured and become successful in other ways. This study attempts to uncover some of the concerns raised by Native teachers about the direction Native communities are headed regarding the status of language and culture. The concepts that guide this exploration are whether language and culture is important to contemporary Native teachers, whether the development and understanding of the terms "language" and "culture" are useful in the classroom, and whether schooling can be recast as a tool to reclaim what has been lost.

Perspectives on Language and Culture and Their Roles in Native Society

That belief that culture consists not just of behaviors but "rather of shared information or knowledge encoded in systems of symbols" has been [End Page 36] proposed by many in the discipline of anthropology, including Clifford Geertz, Ward Goodenough, and Edward T. Hall.7 Goodenough defines culture as a set of mutually held beliefs, routines, customs, principles of organization and action, as well as each individual's personal expression of them. Culture that is shared by a group consists of a mutually apprehensible range of standards for perceiving, believing, evaluating, and acting.8

How language and culture are defined is based on a variety of interpretations and uses of terms. Jerome Bruner, a pioneer in the field of cognitive psychology, explains that "culture shapes the mind . . . it provides us with a tool kit by which we construct not only our worlds but our very conception of ourselves and our powers." He further notes how "learning, remembering, talking, and imagining: all of them are made possible by participating in a culture."9

According to anthropologist Clifford Geertz, culture is "a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forms by means of which people communicate, perpetuate, and develop their knowledge about and attitudes toward life."10 The function of culture is established by participation and interpretation of community members' social habits. Through interaction, members of a community both individually and collectively establish meaning with behaviors that must have consistent interpretation with local community ways of knowing.11 To Geertz, culture is an essential aspect of communities and social groups where behavior and attitude is an expression commonly shared by allowing for interaction and communication among members to play out.

Anthropologist George Spindler notes that culture is "a uniquely human adaptation to the problems posed by life on this planet, as a 'smorgasbord' of possibilities in the form of instrumental behaviors and goals from which individuals can draw (and increasingly from cultures that are not of their own heritage), as a continuity of meaning linking generation to generation and providing identities."12 Spindler views culture as an adaptation that draws from various sources of social behavior and interaction. He infers that the social culture of people changes and that exchange with others is the necessary catalyst for interaction. Interaction of cultures over time has been guided by communication through language, which itself tends to change with cultural evolution. Both interaction and adaptation is evident in today's society, where adaptation and therefore interaction is increasingly noticeable on a global level.

According to linguist Edward Sapir, the term "culture" is interpreted as a social science utilization: "culture is technically used . . . to embody any socially inherited element in the life of man, material and
spiritual." In addition, he notes how researchers analyze culture as a conceptual element derived from human interaction that allows humans to live in a social world within a network of "traditionally conserved [End Page 37] habits, usages, and attitudes"13 Sapir also argues that culture consists of knowledge and experience that characterize how groups make meaning and sustain themselves in a social setting. Finally, he points out that culture is "an emphasis on the spiritual possessions of the group rather than of the individual."14 In each of Sapir's references to knowledge, experience, and tradition, he iterates the importance of how groups use interaction as an essential aspect of their lives.

The term "culture" is synonymous with shared experiences, which include a common language, social and cultural interaction, tradition, and shared practices in a group. The shared experience and beliefs practiced within a complex social system is essentialized by Sapir, Spindler, and Geertz. Each seems to treat "culture" as consistent with traditions, customs, and history. As Mandelbaum puts it, "whereas these loosely used terms refer rather to a psychological, or pseudo-psychological, background of a national civilization, culture includes with this background a series of concrete manifestations which are believed to be peculiarly symptomatic of it."15 Culture may be broadly defined as consisting of shared group experiences and interaction through language, while within each set of socially agreed-to practices is an inherent understanding that the beliefs and traditions sustain the integrity of the local culture. As with Geertz and Spindler, Sapir reinforces this notion by noting that culture consists of behavior, values, beliefs, and knowledge, and the practice of each through interaction is what becomes the local or traditional cultures.

The Role of Language and Culture

A foundation for defining language and culture is to explain how social interaction and communication contribute to change and help people and groups accept communal habits as part of their daily life. Geertz, Spindler, Mandelbaum, and Sapir note that social habits such as traditions, beliefs, and values ultimately contribute to forming a particular identity, and they in turn help communities preserve their sense of commonality. This interpretation infers that language is an essential part of sustaining the social and cultural habits of groups. Both tribal people and mainstream scholars agree that a social form of communication via language is essential to maintenance of culture.

Andrew Dalby, a linguist and historian who predicts that half of the five thousand languages spoken in the world today will be lost in this century, argues that language is essential to culture in several ways: "First, we need the knowledge that they (languages) preserve and transmit. Human beings have been able to evolve cultures that make use of the natural resources of practically every square mile of this planet . . . each culture transmits the cumulated knowledge that has been gained from generation to generation through its language."16 Dalby asserts [End Page 38] that language is not only used as a means of communication but as the carrier of cultural norms and values. He also underscores the value of perspectives: "beyond the transmission of acquired and tested language, we need other languages for the insights they give us into the way things may be—we need them for those alternative world views."17 Finally, Dalby notes the inherent values of diversity in language and culture: "beyond the transmission of knowledge, beyond the transmission of insights into the structure of the human world, we need a multiplicity of languages because it is interaction with other languages that keeps our own languages flexible and creative."18 As a linguist who has studied numerous cultures of the world, he recognizes the importance of the language as a form of communication, diversity, and longevity.

James Crawford, who has written extensively on language shifts, warns "that the death of any natural language represents an incalculable loss"19 and that "the loss of linguistic diversity represents a loss of intellectual diversity." He further notes that "language is a unique tool for analyzing and synthesizing the world, incorporating the knowledge and values of a speech community." In making his point, he quotes a study led by Kenneth Hale, another linguist: "there is the cultural pluralist approach: language loss is 'part of the more general loss being suffered by the world, the loss of diversity in all things.'"20 Crawford affirms the social-justice perspective by emphasizing the value of a diversity of languages and the social values of communication and multiple perspectives. He notes the value of language diversity while acknowledging the potential loss. In this, his views are similar to those of linguist Joshua Fishman, who writes, "The destruction of a language is the destruction of a rooted identity for both groups and individuals."21

Teresa McCarty, a noted anthropologist who has studied Native language and culture, outlines the effect of language loss: "When even one language falls silent, the world loses an irredeemable repository of human knowledge."22 Like Crawford, she inserts a social-justice argument that "language loss and revitalization are human rights issues. Through our mother tongue, we come to know, represent, name, and act upon the world."23 She points to Fishman, who makes an additional point about the fatality of power and domination that will lead to "the concomitant destruction of intimacy, family, and community.'"24 By connecting to the historical challenges of Native people, McCarty argues that a larger paradigm of political struggle is a direct result of changing the Native social and political identity: "efforts to revitalize Indigenous languages cannot be divorced from larger struggles for democracy, social justice, and self-determination."25 In the same tone, McCarty also connects the Native struggle to maintain a distinct identity while recognizing the new potential to succeed as a member of the larger society: "maintaining one's heritage language while learning [End Page 39] additional languages contributes to a strong self and collective identity, helping children to succeed in school and later life."26

The value of language and its practice as a communication tool connects groups and individuals to their social and cultural environment. Yet, as scholars such as Crawford, McCarty, Dalby, and Sapir have shown, for Native groups to maintain their cultural identity, language plays a critical role by forming the basic foundation of identity and diversity. Losing a language has social, cultural, and political consequences: the diversity of all language is diminished; human perspectives and modes of communication are decreased. McCarty urges people to act to save all Native languages. Their loss would mean the success of the political repression and cultural experimentation of the past.

Preserving Language and Culture

Clearly, language and culture are necessary for interaction. Each is created and sustained by its reaction to the changes in the environment, whether that be the human or the natural environment. Yet today societal changes force subdominant cultures to submit or change, and, as a result, people and groups are challenged to persevere, submit, or find alternative ways to maintain their language and culture. This is especially critical for the Native people for whose languages extinction is imminent. Teresa McCarty argues that "indigenous language revitalization confronts not only a colonial legacy of linguicide, genocide, and cultural displacement, but mounting pressures for standardization. Those pressures are manifest in externally imposed 'accountability' standards—high-stakes testing, reductionist reading programs, and English-only policies such as those recently passed in California and Arizona."27 Despite the rather long history of challenges to sustaining Native languages, McCarty notes how continued immigration of cultural groups and evolving federal policy has diminished the practice and existence of Native languages in the United States. "These pressures come at a time when the USA is experiencing an unprecedented demographic shift stemming from the 'new immigratino'—those who have emigrated to the USA since national origin quotas were abolished in 1965."28 Unlike earlier waves of immigration, which originated in Europe and were largely white, recent immigrants are primarily from Latin America, Southeast Asia, and the Caribbean.29 People of color now compose 28 percent of the nation's population, with the numbers expected to grow to 38 percent in 2024, and 47 percent in 2050.30

In the context of these demographic transformations and the larger forces of globalization, there is increasing intolerance for linguistic and cultural diversity. Across the United States, working-class students, students of color, and English-language learners are being deskilled in one-size-fits-all, phonics-based reading programs and simultaneously [End Page 40] constructed as deficient for their low performance on English standardized tests.31 According to McCarty, "There is nothing neutral about these processes. Masquerading as an instrument of equality—as reflected, for example, in the current U.S. policy of 'leaving no child behind'—the pressures for standardization are, in fact, creating a new polarization between those with and without access to opportunity and resources."32

According to James Crawford, "Language renewal faces a perennial barrier to social progress on Indian reservations: scarce resources. Such projects must compete with other, usually more pressing priorities like health care, housing, schooling, and economic development. But since 1980 the federal government has cut back substantially on its support of Indian programs generally." He poses the same question that many Native educators and tribes appear to avoid: "Is there a realistic chance of reversing the erosion of Native American languages?" On tribal land, the answer is clear but avoided altogether. Theoretically, mainstream scholars appear to answer "yes" through historical examples of the miraculous revival of other languages. Currently many tribes across the United States have programs that promote maintenance of Native languages, especially in places where there are only a few elderly speakers remaining.33

There is considerable hope for Native languages, especially where they are still being learned by children, being taught in bilingual education programs, and receiving tribal and institutional support. However, in practice, there is limited progress in curbing the overall pace of language shift. Unless language and culture, as it is understood by society on all sides of the debate on loss, is practiced, sustained, and embedded in daily practice, it cannot be maintained. Scholars have recognized that this bleak situation is unlikely to change without a stronger commitment at all levels and without a substantial infusion of new resources. According to many Native people, preservation is a complex challenge because language and culture are broad and inclusive concepts that are better understood as inclusive terms, and only with practice and support from multiple perspectives at the policy and community levels will there be survival.

This Study on Native Language and Culture

This study used a descriptive quantitative approach that relied on information derived from a survey and a qualitative approach based on case studies that focused on Native teachers' ongoing experience in the classroom. Respondents were asked to explain their understanding and identify reasons they felt language and culture are important and whether they felt language and culture are important. Finally, they were asked to [End Page 41] identify and articulate their interpretation of "language" and "culture." Participants were initially given a survey consisting of short-answer, Likert-scaled, and open-ended questions. Program information was obtained through guided interviews with directors and the less obtrusive collection of documents such as syllabi, grant proposals, and reports.34

Participants were selected based on several criteria: respondents were aspiring Native teachers in their first two years of teaching in Native communities; each had a desire to return to their community after training and showed significant regard for social and cultural integration of tribal and Western ways into the school curriculum; and all identified themselves as Native and had completed a four-year teacher education program at a major university or college in the United States.

The analysis used an emergent method to examine the participants' understanding of language and culture.35 The data evolved through patterns, themes, and development of categories on each iteration of analysis. Refinement of data was made through recognizing patterns of repetition using the conceptually clustered matrix of inferences,36 hints, and direct notations, and references to language and culture by each of the participants. After several iterations, patterns evolved and examples that explained concepts fell into several emergent categories. The patterns of responses turned into categories of concepts mentioned by the participants: beliefs, traditions, ways of life, values, language, history, and customs. From the broad categories, examples, explanations and ways that participants established meaning and interpretation of the terms evolved. In this order, respondents appeared to relate their understanding and meaning of culture.

Analysis and Discussion

Importance of Teaching Language and Culture in Today's Society

Participants all felt that their language and culture are important aspects of teaching in today's classroom and should be an essential part of school curriculum. This sentiment is consistently expressed in the context of changing social and cultural dynamics. One teacher, Danessa, echoed her community's position that "language and culture is [sic] important to student success in terms of identity development and academic success." More specifically, she said, "self-esteem, morals, values that reflect tribal traditions and restoration/preservation of language and culture" are important and should be taught to children in her community. Each participant expressed similar sentiments, that the native identity should be reinforced in their community, and at the same time they cautioned that the essence of their language and culture is losing ground to the mainstream culture. [End Page 42]

Some of the teachers expanded on their idea of language and culture; others stated how important it is that children know and understand what their culture is and how important it is to them. Respondents stated that preserving, sustaining, and perpetuating language and culture in schools is critical. One teacher, Sally, noted, "I know that these children hold the key to the success of my tribe's future . . . the children of today are the leaders of tomorrow." Another teacher from the northern plains mentioned that teaching culture and passing on such knowledge to the younger generation, whether in the classroom or not, is critical to sustaining certain aspects of cultural knowledge. Similarly, several other teachers noted that cultural knowledge in their community is diminishing and is bound to disappear, and that is why it is important that they teach it to everyone while there is still an opportunity to do so. In addition, the teachers acknowledged how important it was that their local language be a part of the school curriculum so that their children can learn their language: "Native languages and culture should be taught in the classroom at the current school that I teach." Although some teachers acknowledged their own limitations with language, each emphasized how the ability to speak the language and knowledge of cultural ways should be sustained and passed to the next generation. The teachers seemed confident that some aspect of their culture and language would be continued by the next generation in spite of various government policies and the lack of support by the tribal government and commitment by the people.

Another consistent theme that evolved was the importance each teacher placed on teaching Native culture to the younger generation, whether through a formal classroom setting or in the home by various members of the family or clan. One Alaskan teacher mentioned how important it was for the Native people in general to find ways to convey traditions and cultural learning to the next generation, who will continue the ways of the people: "We are committed to offering our students a program that provides education in the [local] language, history and culture, traditional skills, together with knowledge of the Western world." Some teachers expressed concern about the current state of their language by noting that in their communities the only means of preserving the language today is through schools and institutions that originally prevented its use.

For nearly all the teachers there were repeated inferences to a direct connection of culture to language and to community. For example, Danessa noted how it was easier for her to teach the local language not only because she is familiar with it but also because she is part of the community: "I am aware of the various cultural aspects of my community. We discuss the landscape of the community, the cultural aspect of the landscapes, and learn about cultural values and certain practices." By her own account, she notes the importance of acceptance, [End Page 43] membership, and finding useful ways to be a contributing member of her community. She also acknowledges that her role and modeling of the community social norms instills in her students the proper behavior and social norms that everyone contributes. She also inferred that acceptance by the community is critical to teaching cultural values that serve as the connection between being part of the community and gaining the support to teach both language and culture.

While the there was complete consensus that language and culture should be taught in the classroom, the respondents stopped short of topics and issues that border religious references and practices and whether they should be included as part of the school curriculum. Everyone indicated that the sacred, ceremonial activities and certain aspects of beliefs that include religion should be taught by an appropriate community member and not by teachers or administrators in the schools. Some teachers did not address this link but passed over it and did not bother to articulate just where they draw the line between religious issues and more general cultural issues. Many mentioned that culture is a broad and a holistic concept that includes religious teachings, but they either did not expand on their reasoning or deliberately left the subject alone by saying that such topics should be addressed by the appropriate medicine people and elders.

The Meaning and Importance of Language and Culture

Participants noted a variety of ways they understood what "culture" meant. Most used the term broadly and without supporting or contextual information that would help to synthesize a deeper meaning. Several of the responses showed some attempt at being inclusive, "To me, culture means the traditions, customs, values, language, and belief system that one grows up with." Another person mentioned that culture is "the traditional ways, beliefs, and customs that guide our lives." Both responses imply that culture is associated with a tradition or patterns of behavior practiced in the past that have been brought forward as a valued practice and behavior, and will continue to be passed on to the next generation. Somewhat related to this understanding are customs and values as they connect to a different type of behavioral practice and, over time, are internalized as valuable practices. One respondent noted how the term connects the manner and ways she observed in her upbringing: "Culture is the traditions, language, and clothing that we were raised with as a child." This statement infers that a particular language is used to define the term "culture." It also references a kind of clothing but is vague on the specific kind. The descriptive aspects of culture seem bound together by a presumption that this definition is made in opposition to another culture, which, in this case, could likely be the dominant Western culture. The reference to language has even [End Page 44] larger implications, because the term assumes that a language of sorts is practiced, and a teacher infers that the tangible aspect of culture in that particular language becomes distinctive only in context. In addition to the nuances of reference as a term, the use of language is much more complex when speaking in the language inferred above. Much of the context and environment of speaking the language is significant but unclear, because the teacher would have to switch languages used in order to clarify meaning, whereas translation into another language creates loss and ambiguity.

Another set of responses reflects a slightly different but more defined statement: "Culture is your life, values, traditions, family ties, the way you bring up your children. It permeates everything you are." Similarly, this response shows another attempt at being comprehensive, but this time the definition is more about the individual as a person. The definition seems to emphasize the self through reference to a person who raises a child. At the same time, there is a clear connection to the family and children and the ways children are taught about life associated with the local family past and history of practices. Another statement is "A culture is a person's heritage, their language, arts, their beliefs, their customs and way of life." What is noticeable in this response is the inclusion of language and a reference to a certain way of life that seems to make a distinction from other ways of life. A similar statement is "Culture involves all aspects of a person's life. Native culture includes history, geography, language, diet, and religious activities." Both of the above statements emphasize an attempt to distinguish a pluralistic reference to society while at the same time, there is an attempt to include a description of the social environment. In another statement, there is reference to the evolving and dependent social environment and at the same time makes a clear distinction: "I believe one's culture stems from values and morals we are taught when young. Native culture is often different than Anglo . . . we should be taught in a way that involves our culture." In this statement there is clear emphasis on learning and on one's own understanding of social culture. The teacher here mentions that this sense of culture is also evolving from social practices and habits that are values and morals. While many of the above statements attempt to refine the concept of culture with a definition, what evolves in the analysis is a more obvious distinction that is hardly noticeable in the previous definitions. In certain cases, the respondents made it clear that the culture being defined is "different than" the Anglo culture or the mainstream society.

The respondents appear to infer that culture includes a belief system. In fact, a large number of the respondents suggested some connection to a broadly defined belief: "To me, culture is the system of beliefs, values, rituals & routines that a person is born & raised with." The respondents imply that culture consists of the social environment [End Page 45] where learning is assumed and happens over a period of time and much of which is integrated into everyday life in a way that enhances or contributes to daily quality of life. The teachers also inferred that a person learns as a part of daily activity, and through iteration and practice different activities and rituals are sustained throughout a lifetime. Which practices are integrated and sustained depends on the circumstances and values that become part of life and daily activity.

Finally there is the statement that serves to blanket human nature: "Culture is a race of human beings that share the same traditional and cultural values." While this statement certainly includes all of humankind, it also notes that there are commonalities and the idea of sameness mentioned in the previous expressions. The fact that humans have something in common is only hinted in the previous descriptions. However, this attempt at exclusion also appears to minimize the descriptions in other ways. This broad definition, while seemingly inclusive, also detracts from the previous definition, which attempts to distinguish the existence of a separate and distinctive culture. While the last definition seems to diminish the separateness and distinction, at the same time the broader definition raises another issue of culture as different because of the language and the ways the social and cultural norms are practiced. At what level should the distinction be drawn, and just where should one draw the line for commonality?

Results and Conclusion

Participants in this study repeatedly noted the important role of Native language and culture in society. In addition, linguists whose work served as the basis for this study reinforced the importance of language diversity and noted how such diversity enhances multiple perspectives on human social and cultural interaction. Both the scholars and the teachers acknowledged the historical challenges the experiment of assimilation placed on Native communities. Each expressed support for preserving traditional culture and for passing it on to the younger generation.

The Importance of Language and Culture

  • • Each teacher also noted a direct relationship between culture and language and how they are not mutually exclusive. They consistently raised concern that the dominant society has forced them to devalue their sense of an identity and more importantly has forced the loss of their Native language. They noted an overall lack of support for preserving their language and culture, or for giving it a role in the classroom. [End Page 46]

  • • All of the respondents mentioned that their "language and culture" should be practiced and included in the classroom. They felt it was increasingly important to teach and pass on this information; Native children will ultimately inherit the values, teachings, and beliefs, which in turn will become their responsibility to pass on to the next generation. This view is shared by both linguists and social-cultural researchers in the literature, who noted the importance of understanding of the term "culture" as it relates to its inclusion in schooling. The participants cited many ways to continue Native language and culture.

  • • Most suggested that children practice a kind of culture dictated by their community social system. More important, many felt that knowing the culture also meant knowing the community's tribal language. Participants often noted that the elders were primarily the ones knowledgeable enough to teach the Native language.

  • • Participants acknowledged that in many communities the younger generation did not speak the tribal language. Children's lack of practice in the language is a concern for participants, who acknowledge a number of reasons for the growing number of children that are not learning their Native language. Most participants shared the opinion that, in order to survive and continue their people's culture, their younger generation must understand their history, stories, traditions, and beliefs, which they felt would carry and keep their people's sense of distinction in the next generation.

  • • Participants acknowledged that the loss of tradition, culture, and language is directly connected to external political pressures, experiments, and economic options. At the same time, many recognize that, with the changing culture, education must include a balance of both Western and local culture, so that children also learn to survive in the mainstream. They suggest that teaching language and culture should exclude religious concepts, which should be left to the elders and medicine people.

Native Meaning of Language and Culture

To many of the teachers, the result of regular practices means understanding about traditions, values, and beliefs. Over time, these terms become socially accepted norms that guide social behavior and practices, which is how the habits of the past evolve into significant practices [End Page 47] of today. However the past is also connected to the present through stories and is acted out socially, and the past is reenacted and retold, again and again, as traditions or beliefs. Through this medium the past is brought forward, exists today as practices, and moves into the future.

  • • Participants frequently defined language and culture through a historical lens. Their responses included many references to the past, where they noted that cumulative events, changes in the environment and language, along with seasonal changes affected behaviors and eventually became values and beliefs. To the Native teachers, culture is historical, is part of the past; it lives today through behavior and should be sustained tomorrow through children.

  • • Although not specifically stated by the teachers, the essence of culture is something learned over the course of a lifetime through exposure to and interaction with community and environment, which implies that one learns over time through interaction and repeated practices and that local "culture" becomes a part of the individual's daily life habits. Some teachers also inferred the reverse also to be true: if one is not exposed and doesn't try to learn, one cannot perpetuate, maintain, or participate in the culture of the community or contribute to the larger society.

  • • Culture seems to be defined as part of daily life, and its stories, and is connected to living a life that is in harmony with the natural world. It is connected to religious life through reverence to various forms of life, and the spiritual integrity of the soul. While most respondents did not mention nor expand on which aspect of culture they defined as religious, they suggested that certain topics should not be discussed in the classroom nor mentioned in public. Many purposely skipped over or refrained from discussing religious aspects of culture. Some preferred to not address the topic by staying away from it completely, while others only hinted that certain topics are sacred.

  • • The teachers frequently implied that a Native person's understanding of language and culture is a function of his or her willingness to learn and exposure to tribal community values and beliefs. This in turn becomes an extension of preservation and sustaining tribal culture and language. While this assessment may be broad and [End Page 48] extensive, or narrow and limited, both scholars and the teachers agree that successful learning and practice depends on persons' willingness and openness to continuing the practice.

  • • While it appeared that most of the participants had an understanding of what "language and culture" broadly means, they did not articulate its interpretation. Instead, the teachers offered various ideas of what language and culture mean to them, suggesting that culture is "everything" in a person's environment. Others listed perceptions, knowledge, and experience as factors. This broad approach to defining the terms had a tendency to diminish specificity for analysis and brushed over important detail that might have contributed to a more thorough understanding.

  • • Each teacher expressed concern that their local cultural practices were not reinforced by communities and other local institutions. Instead they noted how a different social system was gradually being established and reinforced through schooling and education; theirs was being minimalized. They mentioned how institutions support practices that undermine their own sense of culture.

Limitations

One of the more subtle attributes of this study is the kind of response and acknowledgment in the initial stage of the research design. The respondents came from a diverse range of the Native cultural groups. Although each respondent noted the importance of maintaining language and culture and passing them on to their children and their community, all spoke specifically about their own community and place and acknowledged that their understanding is based on their own cultural groups and community and only assumed that other groups felt the same.

Many teachers in the study did not articulate a particular meaning of language and culture that could be finely analyzed. However, in most cases participants made courageous attempts to explain their ideas, thoughts, and feelings. While some gave examples of what they meant by culture without expanding how the examples are connected to their definition, others tried, but such articulation was rare and not always sufficient to distill tangible analytical pieces. Yet the examples and explanations that the participants provided served as a good foundation for analysis and were rich with ideas about language and culture. [End Page 49]

Summary

The terms "language" and "culture" have broad, contextual, complicated, and varied interpretations by the mainstream scholars and the teachers in the study. The manner in which the terms are interpreted varies by geography, language, beliefs, traditions, values, the state of the local social system, and political relations with external pressures and institutions. Language is important as a form of communication, interaction, and as a means of perpetuating culture. While there is not always agreement on whether language diversity is valuable, there remains a concern about language loss and there is a consensus that language and culture are important for cultural preservation, continuation, knowledge, and longevity. There is also agreement that language and culture should be a part of the school curriculum, primarily because schools teach children about life, history, customs, traditions, identity, and values, and children preserve culture by passing on knowledge. Teachers clearly noted that religious aspects, ceremonies, and sacred things do not belong in schools, yet it is not clear where they drew the line between what should be taught in the classroom and what should be left to certain members of the community.

Timothy Begaye

Timothy Begaye (Diné) is from Tsédildo’ii (Hardrock), Navajo Nation, Arizona. He teaches courses in research methods and leadership in education in the College of Education at Arizona State University. His interest in culture has led him to work in many countries, looking at indigenous social and cultural systems. He is a former high school math and social sciences teacher.

Notes

1. E. Duran and B. Duran, Native American Postcolonial Psychology (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995); Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth (New York: Grove Press, 1961); Linda Smith, Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (London: Zed Books, 2000); Paolo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, rev. ed. (New York: Continuum, 1997); Teresa L. McCarty, " Revitalizing Indigenous Language in Homogenizing Times," Comparative Education 39, no. 2 (2003): 147–63.

2. David W. Adams, Education for Extinction: American Indians and the Boarding School Experience, 1875–1925 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2006).

3. Ibid.

4. T. Lomawaima, "Tribal Sovereigns: Reframing Research in American Indian Communities," Harvard Educational Review 70, no. 1 (2006): 1–21.

5. D. M. Pavel, T. R. Curtain, and S. Whitner, "Characteristics of American Indian and Alaskan Native Education: Results from the 1993–94 and 1990–91 Schools and Staffing Survey," Equity & Excellence 31, no. 1 (1998): 48–54; W. Demmert, "Blueprints for Indian Education: Languages and Cultures" (electronic version), ERIC Digest, EDO-RC-94-3 (Charleston, W.V.: Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools, Appalachia Educational Laboratory, 1994): ERIC identifier ED 3722889).

6. Stephen Cornell and Joseph P. Kalt, "Reloading the Dice: Improving the Chances for Economic Development on American Indian Reservations," chapter 1 of What Can Tribes Do? Strategies and Institutions in American Economic Development, ed. Cornell and Kalt (Los Angeles: American Indian [End Page 50] Studies Center at the University of California, 19 92); Joseph P. Kalt and Joseph William Singer, Myths and Realities of Tribal Sovereignty: The Law and Economics of Indian Self-Rule, 2004 paper issued jointly by The Native Nations Institute for Leadership, Management, and Policy (NNI) and The Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development (HPAIED).

7. R. D’Andrade, "Cultural Meaning Systems," in Culture Theory: Essays on Mind, Self, and Emotion, ed. R. Schweder and R. LeVine (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 88.

8. Ward Goodenough, Culture, Language, and Society, 2d ed. (Menlo Park, Calif.: Cummings, 1981), 104. See also Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures (1973; repr. New York: Basic Books, 2000); Edward T. Hall, West of the Thirties (New York: Doubleday, 1994); and Andrade, "Cultural Meaning Systems," 88.

9. Jerome Bruner, The Culture of Education (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1996), x–xi.

11. Ibid.

12. George Spindler, ed., Education and Cultural Process: Anthropological Approaches, 3d ed. (Prospect Heights, Ill.: Waveland Press, 1997), 272.

13. D. G. Mandelbaum, ed., Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in Language, Culture, and Personality (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1949), 309.

14. Ibid.

15. Ibid., 310.

16. Andrew Dalby, Language in Danger (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003), 283.

17. I bid., 284.

18. Ibid., 285.

19. James Crawford, "Endangered Native American Languages: What Is to Be Done, and Why?" http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JWCRAWFORD/brj.htm.

20. Ibid.; Hale quote from Kenneth Hale et al., "Endangered Languages," Language 68 (1992): 1–42 at 3.

21. Joshua Fishman, Reversing Language Shift: Theory and Practice of Assistance to Threatened Languages (Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, 1991), 4.

22. McCarty, "Revitalizing Indigenous Language in Homogenizing Times."

23. Ibid., 148.

24. Fishman, Reversing Language Shift, 4.

25. McCarty, "Revitalizing Indigenous Language in Homogenizing Times," 148.

26. Teresa L. McCarty and M. E. Romero, "What Does It Mean to Lose a Language?" Show & Tell (Fall 2005): 16.

27. McCarty, "Revitalizing Indigenous Language in Homogenizing Times," 159.

28. Ibid.

29. D. Qin-Hilliard, M. Suarez-Orozco, and C. Suarez-Orozco, Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the New Immigration: The New Immigrant and the American Family (Florence, Ky.: Routledge, 2001).

30. J. Banks, Cultural Diversity and Education: Foundations, Curriculum and Teaching (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2001), ix.

31. L. Gutiérrez, "Multicultural Organizational Development" in Beyond Racial Divides: Ethnicities [End Page 51] in Social Work Practice, ed. Lena Dominelli, Walter Lorenz, and Haluk Soydan (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Press, 2001).

32. McCarty, "Revitalizing Indigenous Languages in Homogenizing Times," 159.

33. Leanne Hinton and Kenneth Hale, The Green Book of Language Revitalization in Practice: Toward a Sustainable World (San Diego, Calif.: Academic Press, 1994); Feldman, 1993).

34. M. LeCompte and J. Schensul, Designing and Conducting Ethnographic Research (Walnut Creek, Calif.: Altamira, 1999), 1–3.

35. Matthew B. Miles and A. Michael Huberman, Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1994).

36. Ibid. [End Page 52]

Share

Footnotes

  1. 1. E. Duran and B. Duran, Native American Postcolonial Psychology (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995); Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth (New York: Grove Press, 1961); Linda Smith, Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (London: Zed Books, 2000); Paolo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, rev. ed. (New York: Continuum, 1997); Teresa L. McCarty, " Revitalizing Indigenous Language in Homogenizing Times," Comparative Education 39, no. 2 (2003): 147–63.

  2. 2. David W. Adams, Education for Extinction: American Indians and the Boarding School Experience, 1875–1925 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2006).

  3. 3. Ibid.

  4. 4. T. Lomawaima, "Tribal Sovereigns: Reframing Research in American Indian Communities," Harvard Educational Review 70, no. 1 (2006): 1–21.

  5. 5. D. M. Pavel, T. R. Curtain, and S. Whitner, "Characteristics of American Indian and Alaskan Native Education: Results from the 1993–94 and 1990–91 Schools and Staffing Survey," Equity & Excellence 31, no. 1 (1998): 48–54; W. Demmert, "Blueprints for Indian Education: Languages and Cultures" (electronic version), ERIC Digest, EDO-RC-94-3 (Charleston, W.V.: Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools, Appalachia Educational Laboratory, 1994): ERIC identifier ED 3722889).

  6. 6. Stephen Cornell and Joseph P. Kalt, "Reloading the Dice: Improving the Chances for Economic Development on American Indian Reservations," chapter 1 of What Can Tribes Do? Strategies and Institutions in American Economic Development, ed. Cornell and Kalt (Los Angeles: American Indian [End Page 50] Studies Center at the University of California, 19 92); Joseph P. Kalt and Joseph William Singer, Myths and Realities of Tribal Sovereignty: The Law and Economics of Indian Self-Rule, 2004 paper issued jointly by The Native Nations Institute for Leadership, Management, and Policy (NNI) and The Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development (HPAIED).

  7. 7. R. D’Andrade, "Cultural Meaning Systems," in Culture Theory: Essays on Mind, Self, and Emotion, ed. R. Schweder and R. LeVine (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 88.

  8. 8. Ward Goodenough, Culture, Language, and Society, 2d ed. (Menlo Park, Calif.: Cummings, 1981), 104. See also Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures (1973; repr. New York: Basic Books, 2000); Edward T. Hall, West of the Thirties (New York: Doubleday, 1994); and Andrade, "Cultural Meaning Systems," 88.

  9. 9. Jerome Bruner, The Culture of Education (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1996), x–xi.

  10. 10. Found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clifford_Geertz.

  11. 11. Ibid.

  12. 12. George Spindler, ed., Education and Cultural Process: Anthropological Approaches, 3d ed. (Prospect Heights, Ill.: Waveland Press, 1997), 272.

  13. 13. D. G. Mandelbaum, ed., Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in Language, Culture, and Personality (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1949), 309.

  14. 14. Ibid.

  15. 15. Ibid., 310.

  16. 16. Andrew Dalby, Language in Danger (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003), 283.

  17. 17. I bid., 284.

  18. 18. Ibid., 285.

  19. 19. James Crawford, "Endangered Native American Languages: What Is to Be Done, and Why?" http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JWCRAWFORD/brj.htm.

  20. 20. Ibid.; Hale quote from Kenneth Hale et al., "Endangered Languages," Language 68 (1992): 1–42 at 3.

  21. 21. Joshua Fishman, Reversing Language Shift: Theory and Practice of Assistance to Threatened Languages (Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, 1991), 4.

  22. 22. McCarty, "Revitalizing Indigenous Language in Homogenizing Times."

  23. 23. Ibid., 148.

  24. 24. Fishman, Reversing Language Shift, 4.

  25. 25. McCarty, "Revitalizing Indigenous Language in Homogenizing Times," 148.

  26. 26. Teresa L. McCarty and M. E. Romero, "What Does It Mean to Lose a Language?" Show & Tell (Fall 2005): 16.

  27. 27. McCarty, "Revitalizing Indigenous Language in Homogenizing Times," 159.

  28. 28. Ibid.

  29. 29. D. Qin-Hilliard, M. Suarez-Orozco, and C. Suarez-Orozco, Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the New Immigration: The New Immigrant and the American Family (Florence, Ky.: Routledge, 2001).

  30. 30. J. Banks, Cultural Diversity and Education: Foundations, Curriculum and Teaching (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2001), ix.

  31. 31. L. Gutiérrez, "Multicultural Organizational Development" in Beyond Racial Divides: Ethnicities [End Page 51] in Social Work Practice, ed. Lena Dominelli, Walter Lorenz, and Haluk Soydan (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Press, 2001).

  32. 32. McCarty, "Revitalizing Indigenous Languages in Homogenizing Times," 159.

  33. 33. Leanne Hinton and Kenneth Hale, The Green Book of Language Revitalization in Practice: Toward a Sustainable World (San Diego, Calif.: Academic Press, 1994); Feldman, 1993).

  34. 34. M. LeCompte and J. Schensul, Designing and Conducting Ethnographic Research (Walnut Creek, Calif.: Altamira, 1999), 1–3.

  35. 35. Matthew B. Miles and A. Michael Huberman, Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1994).

  36. 36. Ibid. [End Page 52]