**How do we compel our youth to speak Navajo?:**

**Intersections of Language, Identity, and Power**

Tiffany S. Lee, Ph.D.

University of New Mexico

Paper presentation on April 12, 2007 for the Annual Conference of the
American Educational Research Association (AERA), Chicago, Illinois

*Do not reproduce without permission of author*

In a small, rural community in an interior location of the Navajo
Nation, there is a school that has achieved world-wide recognition for
their incorporation of Navajo language, literacy and cultural knowledge
in every subject area and in every grade kindergarten through twelfth.
The school's former director reported that in the early 1980s, 90% of
the students who entered their school were Navajo speakers. The school
reinforced these students' intellectual, personal, and social
development through their first language. Some ten to fifteen years
later, the director reported that the first language of 90% of
kindergarten students at this school was now English. Language shift
occurred among these families in this community despite the school's
efforts and success at implementing Navajo language curriculum.

Why were families, who assumingly attended this school and benefited
from the Navajo language focus, selecting to raise their children in
English? What was influencing their language choices in their homes, in
the schools, or in the community? This study attempts to address these
questions through the lens of Native youth and young adult perspectives.
Native youth and young adults are cognizant of the nature of language
shift and language loss in their communities. There is much rhetoric in
Native communities about the importance of language for cultural
sustainability. Yet Native youth are also cognizant of messages they
hear that equate success in life with American mainstream goals, such as
job security and material wealth. Often, the two are positioned at
opposition to one another as though one cannot be both successful in
society while also maintaining Native language and cultural lifeways.
This study attempted to learn how Native youth are interpreting messages
of language loss and vitality, and how they are defining their place or
role in society as a member of their Native language group, whether or
not the can speak their language.

**Mixed Messages**

There is an abundance of research that has examined the nature of
language loss, change and revitalization efforts among Native American
and other Indigenous populations (Benjamin, Pecos, and Romero, 1996,
Crawford, 1996, Holm and Holm, 1995, Hornberger, 1996, Hornberger and
Coronel-Molina, 2004, McCarty and Watahomigie, 1998, Romero Little and
McCarty, 2006, Sims, 2001, Pease-Pretty On Top, year?). Native Americans
are not alone in their experiences with language loss as most of the
world's heritage languages are also vanishing (Fishman, 1991, Hinton and
Hale, 2001, Krauss, 1992).

There is less research on Native American young adult's language use or
attitudes. In one important study that included many interviews with
Native youth in the southwest, messages and perceptions regarding
language attitudes and language use between youth and adults were vastly
different. In some cases, the youth expressed feelings of shame or the
teachers attributed apathy on the part of youth with regard to their
language (McCarty, Romero, & Zepeda, 2006). However, these feelings of
shame or apathy may be misunderstood by teachers. McCarty, Romero, &
Zepeda also found that Navajo youth and their teachers had different
perceptions of the number of Navajo speakers in their school. The adults
reported that between 30 and 50 percent of youth in their school could
speak Navajo. On the other hand, the Navajo youth perceived this
percentage to be between 75 and 80. To explain this difference, the
authors explain that the youth viewed speaking Navajo as "emblem of
shame" (p. 38) and hence, give the impression they do not have Navajo
language skills when in school.

This is similar to findings in a study I conducted in early 2000, where
Navajo teenagers expressed fear of stigmatization, in particular fear of
being labeled a "John," if they demonstrated a Navajo accent in their
speech (Lee, in press). Being labeled a "john" is the same as being
called uneducated, poor, unsophisticated, and unintelligent. The shame
the students in my study reported was with regard to the label
associated with the language, not necessarily with the language itself.
The students actually expressed great respect and value for their
language but were pressured to abandon learning or speaking the language
in school-based contexts.

Conversely, if students felt scolded or teased by their relatives or
peers for mispronunciation or grammatical and syntax error of Navajo
words and phrases, this also negatively influenced their language use
(Lee, 1999). Students heard rhetoric in school that speaking Navajo is
not popular, yet they also received messages from their families and
communities about the necessity to speak Navajo to truly identify as a
Navajo person. When they were shamed for their efforts, students
expressed frustration and reluctance to keep learning. McCarty, Romero,
and Zepeda found that the critical factor in reversing this shaming
effect for students was the presence of caring adults. The
misunderstanding continued with the teachers in their study who viewed
students as not caring about their language, yet the youth viewed the
teachers as not caring about them (2006).

These studies show that both youth and adults in school contexts
continuously have to negotiate the status of Native languages against
the privileged position of English. May (1999) argued that this type of
negotiation is a result of the tendency for the dominant society to
connect English with a "modern" world and Navajo or any other Native
language to "tradition" where it is located in a marginalized and
disenfranchised position. He explained, "The language and culture of the
dominant group comes to be viewed as the only vehicle of modernity and
progress, and the only medium of 'national' identity. Alternatively,
other cultural and language affiliations are viewed pejoratively as
merely 'ethnic' and relatedly, as regressive and premodern" (p. 45).

The messages in schools promote the ideology that English and mainstream
ways of life are "in line with modernity, economic development, and
social integration" (Crawford, 1996, p.5). At the same time, students
receive messages about the importance of speaking Navajo. Often, they
are scolded for their limited Navajo (Lee, in press) or assumed to be
feeling shame for their language. Students expressed the value and
respect they feel for the language and heritage, but this contradicts
the expectations they feel in school to live in a "modern" world. This
study intended to reach beyond the simplistic and over-stated notions of
"living in two worlds" which is a problematic notion (Henze and Vanett,
1993). Instead, this study attempted to understand how Native youth
negotiate the world in which they live that encompasses varied, and
often oppositional, expectations from sources in their homes, schools,
and communities. The study explored the power relations and interactions
Native youth experience with regard to learning and using their heritage
language. It offers insight into how they are responding, resolving, and
internalizing mixed messages from powerful sources at home, school, and
in the community regarding the place of language in defining their
identity, and their place and role at home, in school, and in community.
As Benally and Viri (2005) suggest, this generation of youth and young
adults may be one of the last generations to hear active language use in
their communities making their insights and experiences all the more
imperative.

**Methods**

The data for this analysis was taken from two separate studies that
incorporated the use of counter-narratives through 1. interviews with
Navajo teenagers and the transcriptions of those interviews, and 2.
written reflection papers from Native college students. In one study, I
interviewed twenty Navajo teenagers from five different high schools
across the Navajo Nation. I interviewed students about their
socialization experiences related to language learning and language use
in their families, in their schools and in other social contexts. In the
second study, 19 Native college students (representing southwest tribal
backgrounds, mostly Navajo and Pueblo) enrolled in a course on Native
language issues wrote four personal reflection papers each on topics
related to their experiences with language shift, language loss,
language revitalization, and intersections of language and identity. For
the purposes of this study, I characterize counter-narratives to include
the students' stories from both the transcriptions of the interviews and
the reflection papers.

Counter-narratives, also known as counter storytelling (Solorzano &
Yosso, 2002), offer the space for people of color to voice their
knowledge and experiences which counter dominant and hegemonic
narratives of their place and role in society. They interrupt and
challenge dominant rhetoric and ideologies (Gilmore & Smith, 2005 p 69).
The counter-narratives in this study were the means by which the
Indigenous youth in this study voiced their concerns, values,
frustrations, celebrations and dilemmas with regard to their heritage
language and identity. In addition, the method of collecting these
counter-narratives in their original studies are a result of
"microinteractions" (Cummins, 2005, p. 291) that provided an opportunity
and the space for the students to voice their resistance of power
structures located in their communities, in their schools, and in the
wider society. The use of these students' counter-narratives was also an
exploration of ways to accurately represent their "funds of knowledge"
(Moll et. al., 1992) and presentation of self.

**Analysis**

I analyzed the interview transcripts and reflection papers through an
inductive process, or theorizing process, (LeCompte & Schensul, 1999)
that was informed by relevant themes in the literature to identify
statements that were related to these themes. I expected to find
statements relevant to the perceptions of respect for their heritage
language, stigmatization and shame toward their language,
marginalization of their language, and embedded in all this, the
resulting impact on identity. Each of these respective themes was
apparent in the literature. In locating statements in the transcripts
and reflection papers that related to these themes, I identified
statements that occurred often, statements that were related to one
another, statements that were rare or unusual, and statements that were
absent despite my expectations for them.

**Respect**

Not one student in their counter-narratives throughout each interview
and each reflection paper questioned the intrinsic value of their
heritage language. Many students, from the range of fluent speakers to
non-speakers, expressed great respect for their language and heritage.
Some acknowledged its necessity for accessing their spiritual beliefs
and practices. For example, Kelly[^1], a college student, stated "I
believe that the teachings of our culture, traditions, and beliefs are
more meaningful when learned in our native language than when we try to
teach our children these beliefs and customs using another language."
Other students connected their respect for their language with their
respect for the elderly. Lawrence, a Navajo teenager, felt it was
important for students to learn the language out of respect for older
Navajos and to ensure the language will not be lost. He said,

> I'm not saying students should have to take Navajo, but
>
> they should at least know some of it. *Why?* Because that's
>
> who we are, so they can talk with elderly; they were here before
>
> us and they know more than us. Some of them have passed on
>
> and that's why we're losing our language

This association of respect for the elderly and the language of the
elderly was also expressed by Angie, another Navajo teenager, who said,
"I wish I knew Navajo so I could talk to older people. I feel bad when I
can't talk to an older person. It's not my fault. I wish someone had
taught me." She was alluding to experiences where an older person would
approach her speaking in Navajo, and she was not able to respond.
Implicit in her remark is her sense of frustration with not being taught
her heritage language.

Interestingly, even when a student had negative experiences with regard
to their language they still held value and respect for it. One Navajo
teen, Mark, said he had many negative experiences in trying to speak
Navajo, such as scolding from adults and teasing from peers. Despite his
negative feelings toward his experiences in speaking Navajo, he still
held high value for the language. When asked about whether schools
should place more or less emphasis on Navajo language, he said they
should place more emphasis because Native Americans are losing their
language. When he sees children who speak "perfect" Navajo to their
grandparents, he is proud. He feels all Navajo children should know
their language.

**Stigmatization and shame: toward language or toward self?**

What was absent from the students' counter-narratives were direct
expressions of shame for their heritage language. Instead, students
revealed expressions of embarrassment of their own limited Native
language ability, not necessarily embarrassment or shame with the
language itself. They also shared how this impacted their identity and
sense of self.

Natalie, a college student who did research to understand the impact of
language shift in her community made this insight about young people's
embarrassment with their limited fluency in their Native language,

> Many times fluent speakers believe that the younger generations simply
>
> don't want to learn their native Tewa language; however this is not
> always the case. From my research, there are many young people who
> respect the language but have a difficult time putting themselves out
> into the community where they should be speaking the language. Their
> reasons for not taking part in community activities are due to their
> own fear of making mistakes and feeling embarrassed in front of
> elders.

Similar to the earlier remarks made by the Navajo teenager Angie, a
college student who I call Marjorie was also embarrassed about her
limited Navajo skills and resorted to lying to people about her heritage
to avoid the criticism from her own people.

> I worked a full-time job as a tax preparer...and I recall some of the
> times when I needed to get another Navajo to interpret for me, since I
> was unable to speak Navajo. I remember comments from my clients,
> especially the elders, words being said such as "Why don't you speak
> Navajo? What is wrong with you? Why don't you know your language?" I
> did get tired of this and started to tell people that I was of a
> different tribe. It made me feel guilty, but what else was I supposed
> to say or do?

These students counter-narratives suggest that the "shame" youth and
young adults express has more to do with the feelings they attribute to
their own limited ability and limited fluency in their Native language.
Messages and expectations they encounter with regard to their Native
language position these students to blame themselves for their lack of
ability. Those that realized the unfairness and injustice in this
blaming game become resistant and frustrated, such as the many teenagers
who stated in their interviews that their tribal government and schools
should take more responsibility in providing more and effective
opportunities for them to learn. In turn, students redefined and
reasserted their sense of Native identity given their personal level of
Native language fluency. These testimonies will be shared later in the
paper.

**Marginalization**

As mentioned earlier, May (1999) asserted that by nature of the dominant
society's hegemonic position, the dominant language is the only language
that signifies progress and is associated with modernity and
advancement. Conversely, non-dominant cultures and languages are
relegated to a position in the past, as static, and as vanishing. This
message is perpetuated in school systems through a hidden curriculum and
through the school's celebrations, holidays, and activities. The
students recognized this marginalization of their Native language not
only within their school systems, but also within their own communities.
For one college student I named Kristie, this sense of marginalization
extended to her family's Navajo ways of life.

> During the years I attended public school, I realized I was not
> learning my Navajo language, and I felt I was drifting away from my
> culture...I used to think my family was not meeting the aspects of the
> Anglos' way of life

The "aspects of the Anglos' way of life" represents those associated
with the dominant culture and dominant society. She used to believe her
family needed to achieve this way of life in order to progress. Her
education has helped her to see this viewpoint through a more critical
lens.

Natalie recognized the marginalization of her own participation in the
ceremonial life of her community. She expressed an intense desire to
participate through her Native language.

> Cultural reasons greatly motivate me to learn my language. Although I
> practice my culture in many ways, I can't say I truly know my culture
> if I can't speak my language. The two are tied together and one can't
> exist without the other. Because of this interdependency, I feel
> scared not to learn my native language since I will also be losing my
> culture. I no longer want to hear the English version of the meaning
> behind our traditional songs; instead I have a strong desire to
> understand our songs as a Tewa person.

She attributed a discrepancy to her identity as a Tewa person and an
incomplete understanding of her culture because she cannot understand
nor speak her language. This type of desire to know their language in
order to fully understand their culture was very apparent in the
counter-narratives. Yet, the students' also expressed frustration with
their own communities' differences in priorities. Danielle, a college
student, analyzed it this way:

> Personally, I feel that the reason why there has not been a successful
> language revitalization program in my community is because people have
> ranked other issues such as economic development, infrastructure
> development, blood quantity requirements, and personal conflicts as
> more important than preserving our language

Similarly, another student I named Don, who is older and a fluent
speaker of his language, shared this insight with regard to his
community:

> Every morning, I dread walking out the door of my house for fear of
> facing another day of speaking English to people who should be
> speaking our Keres language. Everywhere I turn, someone is talking in
> English to other Keres speaking people in our community

Danielle and Don recognized the marginalization their Native languages
from the people within their communities based on a lack of language
programs and a preferred use of English. Danielle offered further
insights into what Crawford hypothesized as one reason for language
shift. Crawford (1996) suggested that modernity, economic development,
and social integration are more dangerous than the repressive language
policies of schools because the former are signs from within of
community change assimilation. Danielle's observation is indicative of
Crawford's position. She said,

> The most obvious cause for our lack of knowledge in our language and
> culture points to the fact that we are no longer spending time at home
> learning traditional aspects of our culture from our grandparents and
> elders, instead we are off learning things about the modern, English
> dominated world around us. The scary thing is that the BIA schools are
> no longer the obvious threat to our survival as a culture, now the
> danger is internal; it is within us as a community.

These students important insights, observations, and analyses have shed
light onto a new theme that emerged from the data that had not been
addressed in the literature. Throughout the college students'
narratives, the students described experiences of awakening to these
issues of language shift and change in their communities. They became
conscious of the denial they and their families have held regarding
language shift and language loss. With the awareness of the threat of
language loss now more present, they demonstrated a sense of agency and
proactive motivation to transform their families and communities toward
language maintenance and language revitalization.

**Agency and Intervention**

Many students articulated in the interviews and through their writing
their desire to make on impact in their community, such as by bringing
more awareness to the issue of language shift and by implementing their
own strategies to influence young people's mindsets about their Native
languages. Kelly explained how she experienced the denial of language
shift in her own family.

> I was freaked out how much I was in denial, and also how much my
> family is still in denial *(about language shift).* I would ask them
> how they felt about how little our youth and our elders were starting
> to speak our language. My family was like, that is not true, and we
> still speak our language. Then I would just start talking about other
> things going on in my life or some stories about my great-grandmother
> and other relatives. Then I would catch them talking in English, and I
> would raise my eyebrows and they would snap too that they were
> speaking more and more English. It angered many of my family members
> that I was being that observant about our use of our Native language.

The students realized that they can have an influence on their family's
thinking and behavior just by bringing more awareness to the subject of
language shift. Kristie, the student who felt her family was not
progressing because they were not conforming to the dominant society's
ways of life, developed a renewed sense of agency in asserting her
Native identity after she went to college.

> After I graduated high school, I realized I must rediscover my Navajo
> identity because I didn't want to disrespect my family and my Navajo
> people or lose my Navajo culture. To this day, I present myself as a
> Navajo and learning to become fluent with my Navajo language

Similarly, when students were confronted with challenges or opposition
to their expressions of their Native sense of self through their
language, they expressed resistance to those confrontations and
reaffirmed their identity, heritage, and language, regardless of their
level of fluency in their language. For example, Christine explained how
she counteracted an experience of degradation of her language and
culture.

> Now as I continue my life journey I have found that not everyone
> appreciates and respects another's culture or language. I was told not
> to speak my language at work and have once again been threatened. I
> have been through a lot of stress and realize that there will always
> be battles with those whom disrespect. My children are currently
> learning Navajo and we continue to make it fun. My eldest son has
> enrolled in Navajo classes and has learned so much. We know whom we
> are and will never generate shame as to our identity.

Additionally, Rose took seriously the messages regarding the importance
of her language as a means to connect to her culture and identity. But,
she did not allow these messages to diminish her sense being a
contributing member to her community.

> Since I can remember, I have the thought stored in the back of my mind
> and I have been telling myself: 'yeah, *one day* I will learn my
> language.' One day. The days are bypassing me and as each day elapses,
> I lose out on my language. When I think about this situation, it makes
> me feel bad. It almost makes me feel inadequate as a Navajo. Sure,
> language is like the backbone of a culture but just because I cannot
> speak my language does not entirely mean that I am not a *good*
> Navajo. (italics in original)

After becoming cognizant of the language shift occurring in their
families and across Native communities, these students expressed desire
to intervene through their own research, through methods to implement at
home, and through their own efforts to learn their language. It is
hopeful to see that such motivation exists as the status of Native
languages today needs youth who are committed to learning, using, and
passing on their language.

**Implications**

The implications of this research center on the importance of
understanding current Native youth identity, specifically whether
learning and speaking their Native language is an integral part of or
supplementary to their self-perceptions of what it means to be a Native
person. Are their feelings toward their Native language a mixture of
shame and pride? Is *shame* misunderstood in that their shame is with
themselves, not the intrinsic value they place on their language. These
students' counter-narratives show that language is a large part of their
identity, but they struggled with how to learn their language and
maintain it in a world that often makes such choices difficult. Yet,
they remained strongly assertive in their sense of self as a member of
their heritage language community, even when they felt they were limited
in fully accessing and understanding their culture and its associated
worldview.

Sociolinguist Joshua A. Fishman said to maintain or revitalize a
language that is not being inter-generationally transmitted naturally
within a community, there has to be change within that community. There
has to be "consensual advantages for changing from the new ways to the
old ways....There has to be something that they are gaining, that they
believe they are gaining, something that means so much to them that it
is a worthwhile gain to them." ( 1996, P. 7). He goes on to say that
this can be done by a small group of people and the more dislocated the
language, the smaller the group will be. This study is about trying to
create those small groups of Native individuals by sparking a critical
Indigenous consciousness important for language revitalization efforts.
The students' counter-narratives demonstrated that awareness of the
issues surrounding language shift and language loss and their personal
impact on the students' families and communities can motivate students
to resist and transform these situations. For example, Natalie is
continuing her research in her community to inform and implement a
language program. Kelly continues to raise her families' consciousness
about their language choices with her gentle reminders. In turn she has
said her family views her as the language police. Another student,
Jolene, promotes Native language learning and use in her family with
games she invented to play with her younger relatives. These games
require her younger relatives to use their Native language. The older
student, Don, has presented his observations and ideas to his tribal
council about the nature of language shift in his community. The list of
these type of examples goes on and on.

These students are trying to make a difference. At the same time, they
are redefining and reasserting their own personal identity as Native
people within this realm of language change. As one student, Doreen,
articulated it,

> Our miseducation, and even the loss of many of our Indigenous
> languages, painful and unjust as these things are, inform who we are
> now as Indian people, and provide the energy necessary to regroup,
> revitalize and even, in some respects, reinvent who we are.

Her statement succinctly describes a role many Native students now feel
responsibility to fulfill. While many students in this study realized
the inherent value of their language, maintaining and transmitting
language is more difficult when they have to live with competing values
and needs in their communities. Our Native languages and communities
need our youth and young adults not only to realize intrinsic value of
their language, but to act on that value by committing to their language
in a world that often sends them powerful and mixed messages that often
marginalize, stigmatize, and influence feelings of embarrassment or
shame with their own limitations in their language. The students who can
commit to confronting this challenge are inspirational.

Benally, A. and Viri, D. (2005) Diné Bizaad \[Navajo Language\] at a
crossroads:

extinction or renewal? *Bilingual Research Journal, 29,* 85-108.

Benjamin, R., Pecos, R., and Romero, M.E. (1996) Language revitalization
efforts in the

> Pueblo de Cochiti: Becoming 'literate' in an oral society. Chapter in
> N.H. Hornberger (Ed.) *Indigenous Literacies in the Americas: Language
> Planning from the Bottom Up* (pp. 115-136). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter

Crawford, J. (1996) Seven hypotheses on language loss: causes and cures.
Chapter in G.

> Cantoni (Ed.) *Stabilizing Indigenous Languages* (pp. 51-68).
> Flagstaff: Center for Excellence in Education, Northern Arizona
> University

Cummins, Jim (2005) Commentary on part III: Can schools effectively
challenge

> coercive power relations in the wider society? Chapter in T. McCarty
> (Ed.) *Language, Literacy and Power in Schooling* (pp. 283-294)
> Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Fishman, J.A. (1996) Maintaining languages: What works, what doesn't.
Chapter in G.

> Cantoni (Ed.) *Stabilizing Indigenous Languages*. Flagstaff: Center
> for Excellence in Education, Northern Arizona University

Fishman, J.A. (1991) *Reversing Language Shift*. Philadelphia:
Multilingual Matters

Ltd., 40-45

Gilmore, P. and Smith, D. (2005) Seizing academic power: Indigenous
subaltern voices,

> metaliteracy, and counternarratives in higher education. Chapter in T.
> McCarty (Ed.) *Language, Literacy and Power in Schooling* (pp. 67-88)
> Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Henze, R.C. & Vanett, L. (1993) To walk in two worlds or more:
challenging a common

> metaphor of Native education. *Anthropology and Education Quarterly,
> 24*, 116-134.

Hinton, L. and Hale, K. (2001) *The green book of language
revitalization in practice*.

San Diego, CA: Academic Press

Holm, A., & Holm, W. (1995) Navajo language education: retrospect and
prospect.

*Bilingual Research Journal, 19*, 141-167

Hornberger, N. (1996) *Indigenous literacies in the Americas: Language
planning from*

*the bottom up.* Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Hornberger, N. and Coronel-Molina, S. (2004) Quechua language shift,
faintenance, and

> revitalization in the Andes: The case for language planning.
> *International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 167*, 9-67.

Krauss, M. (1992) The world's languages in crises. *Language, 68*, 1-10.

LeCompte, Margaret D., and Schensul, Jean J. (1999) *Analyzing and
interpreting*

*ethnographic data.* Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.

Lee, T. S. (in press) "If they want Navajo to be learned, then they
should require it in all

> schools": Navajo teenagers experiences, choices, and demands regarding
> Navajo language*.* *Wicazo Sa Review*

Lee, T. S. (1999) *Socialization influences on Navajo teenagers language
attitudes and*

> *language use.* Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of
> Education, Stanford University.

May, S. (1999) Language and education rights for indigenous peoples.
Chapter in S.

> May (Ed.) *Indigenous Community-Based Education*. (pp 42-66).
> Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

McCarty, T., Romero, M.E., and Zepeda, O. (2006) Reclaiming the gift:
Indigenous

> youth counter-narratives on Native language loss and revitalization.
> *American Indian Quarterly, 30* (2), 28-48.

McCarty, T., & Watahomigie, L. (1998). Language and literacy in American
Indian and

> Alaska Native communities. Chapter in B. Perez (Ed.) *Sociocultural
> Contexts of Language and Literacy* (pp. 69-98) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
> Erlbaum Associates

Moll, L.C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., and Gonzalez, N. (1992) Funds of
knowledge for

> teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and
> classrooms. *Theory into Practice, 21*, 132-140.

Pease-Pretty On Top, J. *NA Lang Immersion: Innovative Native education
for children*

> *and families.* W. K. Kellogg Foundation of Battle Creek, Michigan: A
> Project of the American Indian College Fund.

Romero Little, M. E. and McCarty, T. (2006) *Language planning
challenges and*

> *prospects in Native American communities and schools.*
> (EPSL-0602-105-LPRU) Tempe, AZ: Education Policy Studies Laboratory,
> Language Policy Research Unit, Arizona State University

Sims, (2001) Chapter in Hinton and Hale (Eds) *The green book of
language revitalization*

*in practice*. San Diego, CA: Academic Press

Solorzano, D. and Yosso, T. (2002) A critical race counterstory of race,
racism, and

affirmative action. *Equity and Excellence in Education, 35* (2),
155-168.

[^1]: All names are pseudonyms