U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

29–628 PDF 2006

RECOVERY AND PRESERVATION OF

NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGES

FIELD HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION 

AND THE WORKFORCE 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

August 31, 2006, in Albuquerque, New Mexico

Serial No. 109–55

Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/house 

or 

Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov 

(II)

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE 

HOWARD P. ‘‘BUCK’’ McKEON, California, Chairman

Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin, Vice Chairman 

Michael N. Castle, Delaware 

Sam Johnson, Texas 

Mark E. Souder, Indiana 

Charlie Norwood, Georgia 

Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan 

Judy Biggert, Illinois 

Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania 

Patrick J. Tiberi, Ohio 

Ric Keller, Florida 

Tom Osborne, Nebraska 

Joe Wilson, South Carolina 

Jon C. Porter, Nevada 

John Kline, Minnesota 

Marilyn N. Musgrave, Colorado 

Bob Inglis, South Carolina 

Cathy McMorris, Washington 

Kenny Marchant, Texas 

Tom Price, Georgia 

Luis G. Fortun ̃ o, Puerto Rico 

Bobby Jindal, Louisiana 

Charles W. Boustany, Jr., Louisiana 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Thelma D. Drake, Virginia 

John R. ‘‘Randy’’ Kuhl, Jr., New York 

[Vacancy] 

George Miller, California, 

Ranking Minority Member 

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan 

Major R. Owens, New York 

Donald M. Payne, New Jersey 

Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey 

Robert C. Scott, Virginia 

Lynn C. Woolsey, California 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Carolyn McCarthy, New York 

John F. Tierney, Massachusetts 

Ron Kind, Wisconsin 

Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio 

David Wu, Oregon 

Rush D. Holt, New Jersey 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Betty McCollum, Minnesota 

Danny K. Davis, Illinois 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Chris Van Hollen, Maryland 

Tim Ryan, Ohio 

Timothy H. Bishop, New York 

[Vacancy]

Vic Klatt, Staff Director 

Mark Zuckerman, Minority Staff Director, General Counsel 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

Hearing held on August 31, 2006 ........................................................................... 1

Statement of Members: 

McCollum, Hon. Betty, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Minnesota, prepared statement of ........................................................... 51

McKeon, Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck,’’ Chairman, Committee on Education 

and the Workforce ......................................................................................... 1

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 2

Petri, Hon. Thomas E., Vice Chairman, Committee on Education and 

the Workforce ................................................................................................ 3

Udall, Hon. Tom, a Representative in Congress from the State of New 

Mexico ............................................................................................................ 5

Wilson, Hon. Heather, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

New Mexico ................................................................................................... 4

Resolution of support from All Indian Pueblo Council ........................... 42

Statement of Witnesses: 

Cornelius, Dr. Carol, Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin ......................... 30

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 33

Montoya, Sam, language and cultural resource administrator, Pueblo of 

Sandia ............................................................................................................ 34

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 37

Shije, Amadeo, Chairman, All Indian Pueblo Council .................................. 8

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 11

Sims, Christine P., Ph.D., assistant professor, department of language, 

literacy, and sociocultural studies, Institute for American Indian Education, College of Education, University of New Mexico ........................... 23

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 27

Tabaha, Kimberly J., student of Window Rock High School ........................ 39

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 41

Wilson, Ryan, president, National Indian Education Association ................ 11

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 15

Additional Material Submitted: 

Cross-Maple, Dr. Kathryn, Indian Education Division, New Mexico Department of Education .................................................................................. 58

Gregory, Dr. George Ann, Choctaw/Cherokee ................................................ 52

Native American Review Article by Jon Reyhner, Ed.D., Professor of 

Education, Northern Arizona University .................................................... 54

Tso, Eddie, program director, office of Dine ́ culture, department of Dine ́

education, the Navajo Nation, prepared statement of ............................... 53

Wacondo, Elizabeth, librarian, the Laguna Public Library, Pueblo of Laguna, prepared statement of ........................................................................ 53

Washington State Tribal Leader Congress on Education on Recovery 

and Preservation of Native American Languages ...................................... 57

(1)

RECOVERY AND PRESERVATION OF

NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGES 

Thursday, August 31, 2006

U.S. House of Representatives 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

Washington, DC

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 2:30 p.m., at the Indian 

Pueblo Cultural Center, 2401 12th Street, NW, Albuquerque, New 

Mexico, Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon (chairman of the committee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives McKeon, Petri, Wilson of New Mexico, 

and Udall of New Mexico. 

[Invocation given by Pueblo Santo Domingo Governor Julian 

Coriz in his native language.] 

Chairman MCKEON. Thank you for that invocation. Even though 

I couldn’t understand the language, I understood the spirit and I 

appreciate it and it’s very fitting that we have the invocation in 

your native tongue. Thank you very much. 

We are holding this field hearing today to hear testimony on the 

recovery and preservation of Native American languages. With 

that, I ask unanimous consent for the hearing record to remain 

open 14 days to allow member statements and other extraneous 

material referenced during the hearing be submitted into the official hearing record. Without objection so ordered. 

Good afternoon. Welcome. In August the congressional district 

work-period offers us a unique opportunity to personally visit districts such as Congresswoman Wilson’s and encourage dialog on 

matters affecting local citizens. This hearing represents such an opportunity. Today we will be discussing an important issue to this 

community and much of the Southwest, the loss of Native American languages, as well as potential solutions for language preservation. 

Yesterday I was in Flagstaff and we were talking about the No 

Child Left Behind Act but there was much discussion on this issue 

that we will be talking about today, and I’m glad that some of the 

people that were in that discussion yesterday, I know, have traveled to be with us here today, and I thank you all for being here 

for your attendance. 

Before we get started, though, I would like to take a moment for 

thank Representative Heather Wilson for hosting today’s hearing 

in her district and the work she has done on this important issue 

that we are discussing. I also thank my colleague and Vice-ChairVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:58 Nov 06, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\DOCS\FC\8-31-06\HED243.000 EDUWK PsN: DICK
2

man of our committee, Representative Tom Petri, as well as Representative Tom Udall, also from New Mexico, for joining us here. 

Congressman Petri came from Wisconsin. Got up very early this 

morning to be with us and I appreciate him. 

Today’s hearing is an important one, not only for this community 

but, frankly, for Congress as well. Sadly, in Native American communities across the country, native languages are in rapid decline. 

In fact, it’s estimated that only 20 indigenous languages will remain viable by the year 2050. As a result of this rapid decline, 

some communities across the country have made language recovery 

and preservation one of their highest priorities. The link between 

education, language and culture is considered by many as paramount to preserving the identity of Native Americans. Many in the 

Native American community believe the loss of native languages 

may be slowed by increasing support for Native immersion programs. With that in mind, in February of this year, Congresswoman Wilson introduced the Native American Languages Preservation Act. 

Congresswoman Wilson’s bill would establish grants for Native 

American language educational organizations, colleges, governments and organizations to help preserve native cultures and languages. The philosophy behind these programs is very basic. Advocates of these programs argue that language immersion programs 

are effective ways of creating fluent native language speakers. And 

data also points to another benefit. Native students who go through 

an immersion program perform substantially better academically 

than Native students who have not gone through such a program. 

In fact, some national studies on language learning and educational achievement have indicated a direct correlation between 

language learning and higher academic achievement. 

Today we will have an opportunity to examine the concept of language immersion in greater depth and consider the role it could 

play in our efforts to slow the decline in Native languages. We will 

hear the perspectives of expert witnesses on how to address the 

issue of language loss, recovery, and preservation. And, indeed, we 

will be taking an in-depth look in Representative Wilson’s Native 

American Languages Preservation Act. 

Can you hear me back in the back? I am giving a wonderful 

speech. Can you hear me now? Now? We’re working on this. Now? 

Should I turn the mike on? Now? 

It really wasn’t that good. OK. Somebody said we might just 

need a battery in this mike. 

I want to thank our witnesses for being here with us today. We 

have a distinguished panel of witnesses. I would like to begin by 

welcoming all of them here. Right after we have some statements 

from the other members. Who are we going to start with? Mr. 

Petri? Are you giving an opening statement? Let’s go right down 

the line. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman McKeon follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon, Chairman, 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

Good afternoon—and welcome. In August, the congressional district work-period 

offers us a unique opportunity to personally visit districts, such as Congresswoman 

Wilson’s, and encourage dialogue on matters affecting local citizens. This hearing 

3

represents such an opportunity. Today we will be discussing an issue important to 

this community and much of the Southwest: the loss of Native American languages 

as well as potential solutions for language preservation. 

Before we get started, though, I’d like to take a moment to thank Representative 

Heather Wilson for hosting today’s hearing here in her district and for her work on 

the important issues we’ll discuss. I also thank my colleague and the Vice-Chairman 

of our Committee, Representative Tom Petri, as well as Representative Tom Udall—

also from New Mexico—for joining us here. 

Today’s hearing is an important one, not only for this community, but frankly for 

Congress as well. Sadly, in Native American communities across the country, Native 

languages are in rapid decline. In fact, it is estimated that only 20 indigenous languages will remain viable by the year 2050. As a result of this rapid decline, some 

communities across the country have made language recovery and preservation one 

of their highest priorities. The link between education, language, and culture is considered by many as paramount to preserving the identity of Native Americans. 

Many in the Native American community believe the loss of Native languages 

may be slowed by increasing support for Native language immersion programs. With 

that in mind, in February of this year, Congresswoman Wilson introduced the Native American Languages Preservation Act. Congresswoman Wilson’s bill would establish grants for Native American language educational organizations, colleges, 

governments, and organizations to help preserve Native cultures and languages. 

The philosophy behind these programs is very basic. Advocates of these programs 

argue that language immersion programs are effective ways of creating fluent Native language speakers. And data also points to another benefit: Native students 

who go through an immersion program perform substantially better academically 

than Native students who have not gone through such a program. In fact, some national studies on language learning and educational achievement have indicated a 

direct correlation between increased language learning and higher academic 

achievement. 

Today, we’ll have an opportunity to examine the concept of language immersion 

in greater depth and consider the role it could play in our efforts to slow the decline 

in Native languages. We’ll hear the perspectives of expert witnesses on how to address the issues of language loss, recovery, and preservation. And, indeed, we’ll be 

taking an in-depth look into Representative Wilson’s Native American Languages 

Preservation Act. 

I believe today’s hearing will be very insightful and will help us better understand 

the importance of preserving indigenous languages and cultures, and I thank our 

witnesses and other stakeholders for joining us this afternoon. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It’s a real 

pleasure for me to be here in beautiful, sunny, pleasant, early fall 

Albuquerque, New Mexico to discuss the recovery and preservation 

of Native American languages. I am looking forward to the opportunity to hear from Native American language advocates on what 

can be done to preserve these languages for future generations. 

While several bills have been introduced in this general area, I 

would like particularly to recognize our colleague, Congresswoman 

Heather Wilson, for her recognized leadership on this issue embodied by her introducing of H.R. 4766, the Native American Languages Preservation Act, which would provide Federal support for 

programs that provide training for young children and their family. 

It’s increasingly clear that each year the numbers of Native 

American speakers of their own language as a first language is 

rapidly declining. Of the nearly 300 Native languages of the United 

States only some 210 are still spoken, and one of the witnesses we 

are going to be hearing from, Mr. Ryan Wilson, President of the 

National Indian Education Federation, references in his testimony 

a prediction that there will not be 210 but possibly only 20 languages spoken in the year 2050. That’s a trend we don’t want to 

see—prediction we don’t want to see translated into reality. Of 

4

course, quite often these languages are spoken only among the elderly. 

Efforts are underway to preserve these languages and encourage 

a new generation of Native Americans to keep these languages 

alive as an integral part of Native American culture and identity. 

Please, and I should note, I am not the only one to come from 

the northern tier, as it’s called, of Wisconsin. We have a representative I have the Oneida tribe in my home state joining us today. 

As you will hear, Dr. Carol Cornelius has led efforts among the 

Oneida nation to preserve its language since 1996 after recognizing 

that only 25 to 30 elders spoke Oneida as a first language. Oneida 

since made language preservation a priority by pairing elder native 

speakers with younger English speakers to train a new generation 

to appreciate and preserve their traditional language. I look forward to hearing from all of our witnesses on current programs underway and what we can do to further preserve traditional languages. I thank you again, Chairman McKeon, for your leadership 

on this issue and having the hearing today. 

Chairman MCKEON. Ms. Wilson. 

Mrs. WILSON OF NEW MEXICO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I 

wanted to thank you personally for coming here to New Mexico. I 

know for you it’s a trip back to New Mexico and that for a time 

in your misspent youth you lived here in Albuquerque. 

Chairman MCKEON. Well-spent youth. 

Mrs. WILSON OF NEW MEXICO. And we wanted to welcome you 

back to New Mexico and thank you for your interest in this issue 

that’s very important to us. And I also wanted to thank Tom Petri 

for coming down. I know there’s no direct flight from Wisconsin to 

Albuquerque that I know of and I very much appreciate your efforts to get here today. 

I also wanted to thank my colleague, Tom Udall for his involvement and support on this issue and, of course, our witnesses that 

are here today, those who are visiting New Mexico as well as those 

who are deeply involved in the issue here locally. I look forward to 

your testimony today, very much so. 

And, of course, those of you who have chosen to come today to 

hear this, I wasn’t sure how many folks would come. I was expecting maybe 20 or 30, you know, and the fact that so many people 

have come today, so many tribal leaders are here, tribal council 

leaders and Governors and lieutenant Governors and educational 

leaders are here today, is a visible demonstration of how important 

this is to New Mexico and to our tribes. Here in New Mexico we 

have 19 different Pueblo and three tribes, multiple language and 

dialects, but I first became interested in the issue when the Hickory Apache tribal council came to see me and said they were starting a language nest to preserve their language, and shortly after 

that, I was at Sandia Pueblo at their early childhood education center where they led the stream of money from Head Start with other 

tribal funds and have a very good child care program that starts 

at 6 weeks old and goes all the way to the first day of kindergarten. 

What was to me—there were a lot of wonderful things going on 

there, but one of them was that the grandmas come, and they come 

to sing and speak to the babies and the children so that they will 

5

have a language that their parents do not have; that it’s skipping 

a generation, and that’s how they are trying to restore their own 

use of their own language. 

Survey of native languages found that among the Apache in the 

Mescalero reservation in Southern New Mexico there are only ten 

native speakers left. At Sandia Pueblo north of Albuquerque most 

of their native speakers are middle-aged or older because they 

wanted their children to learn English and now they are having to 

skip a generation to preserve the language. 

Even among the Navajo, Navajo is spoken by more Native Americans about any other language in the United States. Even Navajo 

is endangered. Navajo children, only half of Navajo children starting kindergarten are fluent in their native language. That’s why I 

introduced H.R. 4766, to try to preserve these languages, because 

language is connected to culture, and culture is what we celebrate 

here in New Mexico. 

It’s intended to create and expand this idea of language nests 

and language survival schools and also to set up a demonstration 

program with universities and combine the strength and teaching 

at universities with the ability to teach language in new ways and 

preserve this wonderful heritage and culture that we enjoy here in 

New Mexico. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you again for your willingness to be attentive to this issue, to come back to New Mexico and to share this 

day with us. We appreciate it. 

Chairman MCKEON. Mr. Udall. 

Mr. UDALL OF NEW MEXICO. Mr. Chairman, thank you very 

much, and I also very much appreciate you being here and being 

a part of this community. You can see how welcome you are by this 

incredible attendance we have today, so thank you for coming. 

Knowing what you did when you were here in New Mexico as a 

youth, I am not sure it was misspent. I think it was very well 

spent. But we won’t get into that. 

First of all, I just would like to put in two statements into the 

record, Mr. Chairman. The New Mexico Department of Education 

is represented here by Dr. Kathryn Cross-Maple of the Indian Education Division. Kathryn is the cabinet secretary, and they have a 

statement on what the State of New Mexico has done in Indian 

education and native language initiatives. Also, your committee 

member, Betty McCall, was unable to be here, but she wants to 

have a statement put into the record. 

Chairman MCKEON. No objection. So ordered. 

Mr. UDALL OF NEW MEXICO. With that, let me thank you and 

Ranking Member Miller for holding this hearing on an issue that 

is central to the culture and history of our great state. I hope your 

visit will help underline the need to quickly pass bipartisan legislation on language preserving native languages as so many of our 

tribes and Pueblos will demonstrate the importance that language 

has in their way of life. 

Additionally, I would like to welcome the various Pueblo leaders, 

Native American language experts and others who are in attendance. I thought it was particularly nice that we had a small reception before where we were able to exchange some ideas there. 

6

For too long in this state and throughout our country, we did not 

appreciate the importance of language and its ability to enhance 

the rich dynamics of our history. From learning the ancestry of 

those who came before us to passing stories down through generations, to maintaining religious, cultural and social ties, language is 

fundamental. We now recognize the need to cultivate and pass languages along to our children and grandchildren. 

I have had the great honor of visiting the Pueblo in my district 

during my four terms in office and learning the traditions and 

characteristics unique to each individual tribe. In those visits, I 

have had the opportunity to go to two Pueblos that I would just 

like to recognize for their native language program. One is Santa 

Clara, where I visited in the last couple years, and they have an 

excellent program, and also I was at Tesuque Elementary School 

where their program is making great progress. 

Both of these Pueblos, I think, have excellent programs and they 

are making great progress in having every tribal member speak his 

native language. 

There’s no doubt in my mind that we need to strengthen our efforts at promoting native language preservation, and we must do 

so starting today. Native languages are being lost at a rapid pace. 

Tribal members are often the only ones fluent in the language as 

an increasing number of children are growing up in homes that 

only speak English. If we do not act soon, we will face a situation 

where the languages begin to die with the elders. 

If we truly hope to prevent the loss of these languages, we must 

find a solution, a bipartisan solution, which will put in place new 

immersion programs that are urgently needed. Studies show such 

programs offer the best opportunity for languages to be passed on. 

Certainly if there is a shortage of individuals speaking Native 

American language, there is no shortage of those who hope to see 

those languages revived and preserved and immersion programs 

will help fulfill that need. 

I want to applaud the efforts made by Representative Ed Case 

and my colleague here in New Mexico, Representative Heather Wilson, to expand and enhance the Native American language preservation programs currently in place, and I believe that their legislation is a big step in the right direction. While there are some differences between the bills that have been introduced, I have complete faith that common ground can and will be found. Authorizing 

legislation for new programs must move forward and time is of the 

essence if we want to stem the loss of these languages. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you and Ranking Member Miller 

once again for focusing the attention of the committee on this extremely important issue and for taking the time to visit our state. 

I believe we can all agree that there’s an urgent need to protect 

and preserve Native American languages and we must invest by 

implementing new immersion programs. 

With the current state of Indian education, our great nation faces 

many great challenges. I am thankful for your attention to this 

issue and hope that we will see in the very near future subsequent 

hearings on these issues. There is definitely a deep reservoir of intelligence and expertise in New Mexico, and we are happy to welcome you and your committee back any time. 

7

I also want to just recognize Representative Petri. Representative 

Petri and I are sponsoring a piece of global warming legislation, bipartisan piece of legislation. Why would I bring this up in this context? Because for me native languages are about the traditions 

with the earth, the fact that we come from Mother Earth, that we 

are part of Mother Earth, and I believe that the traditions that are 

represented in those languages have much to teach us. If we had 

adopted the ways that you had and the views that native people 

had of the earth, we would be a lot further along in terms of protecting our planet. 

So Representative Petri, you and I are on the front on the global 

warming battle but the native tribes are way ahead of us so we 

have a lot to learn today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Great to be 

here today. 

Chairman MCKEON. Thank you very much. Now I would like to 

introduce our witnesses. First will be Mr. Amadeo Shije. He is 

chairman of All Indian Pueblo Council here in Albuquerque. The 

All Indian Pueblo Council is a consortium of the 19 Pueblo tribal 

governments in New Mexico and provides essential services to the 

Pueblo people. He was born and reared on the Zia Indian reservation and is a former Governor of the Pueblo of Zia. At age 18 he 

was inducted into the tribal council and is serving a lifetime appointment. Mr. Shije is a veteran of the U.S. Navy and a graduate 

of New Mexico Highlands University. 

Then we will have Mr. Ryan Wilson, President of the National 

Indian Education Association, which is the largest and oldest Indian educational organization in the Nation that is committed to 

increasing educational opportunities and resources for American 

Indian, Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian students while protecting their cultural and linguistic traditions. He is a member of 

the Ogalla Lakota Nation from Pine Ridge, South Dakota. 

I served a mission here for our church with the Latino people. 

My brother served a mission in Pine Ridge with the Indian people. 

I didn’t know you were from there. That’s good. 

He is also highly involved in tribal youth development where he 

serves as the Executive Director of the American Indian Youth 

Leadership Institute, the Northwest Indian Youth Conference and 

the IWSA Boys and Girls Club. Mr. Wilson is a graduate of the 

University of Washington. 

Then we will have Dr. Christine Sims, Assistant Professor in the 

Department of Language, Literacy and Sociocultural Studies at the 

University of New Mexico. She is one of the founding members of 

the Linguistic Institute For Native Americans, which is a New 

Mexico based nonprofit organization serving Native American 

tribes and language programs. Over the course of 20 years, she has 

organized summer institutes in New Mexico known as the Summer 

Institute of Linguistics for Native Americans, regional Native language conferences and workshops for Native Americans’ local 

tribes. She is a tribal member of Acoma Pueblo and resides on the 

Acoma Pueblo Indian Reservation in Northwestern New Mexico. 

Then we will have Dr. Carol Cornelius. She has been an area 

manager for the Oneida Cultural Heritage Department for the 

Oneida Tribal Indians for the past ten and a half years. She is also 

adjunct professor at the University of Wisconsin in Green Bay. She 

8

has written numerous publications on the history of the Oneida 

tribe and served as consultant for numerous Native Americans at 

this time. In addition, school board member for the Oneida Native 

Elementary School and is co-president of the Cornell Education Society at Cornell University. 

I used to serve on a local school board. I had a friend tell me 

there’s a special place in heaven for people who serve on the local 

school boards. I am hoping that’s the case. 

Dr. Cornelius earned her Ph.D. From Cornell University. 

Then we will hear from Mr. Sam Montoya, the Language and 

Cultural Resources Administrator at the Pueblo of Sandia. Mr. 

Montoya also works as an Area Roads Program Manager and the 

Economic Development Program for the Bureau of Indian Affairs. 

He is fluent in Southern Tiwa and Spanish, and I presume English. 

Mr. Montoya is a graduate of Fort Louis college in Durango, Colorado. 

Finally, Ms. Kimberly Tabaha is a senior at Window Rock High 

School. You are just a kid. In Fort Defiance, Arizona, and also a 

student of the Navajo Language Immersion School. Welcome, all of 

you. Let’s hear first then from Mr. Shije. 

STATEMENT OF AMADEO SHIJE, CHAIRMAN, ALL INDIAN 

PUEBLO COUNCIL 

Mr. SHIJE. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman McKeon and members of the committee. Welcome to New Mexico, and in particular 

I would like to welcome back Representative Heather Wilson and 

also Mr. Tom Udall. Welcome back to New Mexico. It’s always good 

to see you back on the home grounds. 

You know, when tribes get together, we always seem to talk 

about some negative things and some things that we are reactant 

to, and hardly ever do we talk about those things that are really 

good news. Today I would like to, if the committee will indulge me 

for a minute or two, I would like to introduce a group of young people—I don’t know if they are in the audience—but these young people hail from the very village where I was born and raised. They 

attend the Zia Elementary School up in Zia Pueblo. The good thing 

about that school is in the last four consecutive years they are the 

only school in the Albuquerque region, the Albuquerque Bureau 

area, that had attained the annual yearly progress, what a lot of 

people call AYP. 

These students have been able to do that with a lot of obstacles, 

and one of the biggest obstacles was the fact that there is not 

enough funding for language teachers up at that school. 

One individual, one young lady—I don’t know if she is in the audience—Laurie Pino, if you will stand. There she is right there. 

She, by herself, has been able to go through all these classes and 

teach these young people the language and everything associated 

with the tribe, the cultural background, the histories and sitting 

around and talking to them, telling stories, because that’s the way 

of the Pueblo people, and that is how you learn because the language is not written. So everything has to be communicated orally. 

With that, I would like to congratulate the students as well as the 

faculty from the Zia Elementary Middle School. They have attained 

so much and we hope that they continue to flourish as they go 

9

along, because we do have students that are excelling up in that 

area. 

Today I sit before you as the 19th Chairman of the All Indian 

Pueblo Council. The Council was first recorded as having its first 

meeting in the year 1598. There was 30 some odd—38 tribal leaders at the time. They were holding the meeting. Insofar as what 

the topic of discussion I can only assume was probably discussion 

about the emergence from the east, the emergence from the west 

of non Indian individuals, and they were probably sitting around 

wondering and talking how they should accept these visitors coming in from these two directions. 

And I always tell this story about I think the Pueblo did such 

a great job of having a welcome reception for these people that they 

never left the country. They stayed behind. That’s what you call 

Pueblo hospitality. 

As Pueblo Indians, we value our language, traditions, culture, religion, people and way of life. In spite of detrimental Federal policies of the United States, the Pueblo communities still practice 

their daily ceremonial lifestyles. There are no rights or duties more 

precious to us than those regarding religion and ceremonies, and 

in every aspect of our daily lives and fulfilling our daily existence 

the use of the language is there. Language has been and continues 

to be our last stronghold of the traditional form of government 

which existed long before Columbus and long before the formation 

of the United States. 

The protection of our language and religious freedom of our communities is critical to the pueblo’s existence and survival. As Pueblo people, we give value to those things that make us Indian people. Our language, our culture, the values and traditions that perpetuate our cultural survival. 

At the same time, we must give equal value to educating and developing those skills necessary to deal with the external communities, to protect our communities internally, thus creating a balance in our lives. This statement I took from a Pueblo man, Mr. 

Regis Pecos. 

The continuance of Pueblo values and traditions are dependent 

upon the continued use of our native language. Unfortunately, this 

process has been seriously impacted by historical factors that have 

attempted to destroy our language and culture. This has included 

constant changes to Federal educational policies, key events 

throughout the history of this nation that have impacted tribes and 

treatment of native people. 

Chairman McKeon, you indicated earlier it is estimated that only 

20 indigenous languages will remain viable by the year 2050. For 

some tribes, this is already occurring. The loss of the language has 

already occurred. In others, efforts to maintain and revitalize native languages are being seriously pursued through communitybased and school-based language efforts. This is accompanied by 

utilizing fluent speaking elders, traditional leaders and encouraging young parents who speak the language to teach and take the 

responsibility to teach their young children. 

One of the ways that we continue to immerse language in our 

communities here in the Pueblo country is we still have community 

gatherings. We still have community work where the tribal memVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:58 Nov 06, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\FC\8-31-06\HED243.000 EDUWK PsN: DICK
10

bers come together and work on certain project as a whole. The 

whole family comes out to help. This is one way to teach our young 

people the culture and also at the same time, during these functions, the tribal language is spoken. 

Because the Pueblo people are close-knit, they live in close proximity to one another, and growing up I thought that was one of the 

reasons why I was able to really grasp hold of the culture and traditions of my tribe and to be able to speak the language. I am considered to speak fluent Pueblo language, but is it really fluent? Because some of our elders that are currently with us still are telling 

us, ‘‘You are losing. We are not speaking what we used to hear 

when we were young people,’’ so I am assuming that the language 

has already been lost to some certain extent. Whether we are able 

to retrieve it or get it back, that’s a question and answer that has 

to be answered by the tribe themselves. 

The need for language survival is an issue of increasing concern. 

In particular, the Pueblo language in our state reflects a history 

which I would like to think as some of the oldest and longest sustained culture in the nation. Our languages have existed and today 

all functions within the sociocultural and socio-religious community 

continues on. 

What I mean here is that the language that we speak is not written, so in order for us to maintain the language, we have to teach 

our young people through storytelling, through activities, as I mentioned earlier, by community work. We also have some areas where 

we have in some of our younger people the Head Start program 

where we have been able to bring tribal members to come and talk 

to these young people in their language, and by doing that the 

young people have been able to speak. I am glad to say in my community and most of the Pueblo communities our very young people 

are starting to speak the language once again, and that’s great to 

see and that’s what makes, I believe, our elder people happy when 

they see that. 

To lose our language means the loss of everything that we Pueblo 

people stand for. I don’t think there is a single individual in this 

room that can say that we will lose our language, because I don’t 

think we will. We have sustained, been able to carry on the language and we will continue to do so. 

So on behalf of the All Indian Pueblo Council, a consortium of 

New Mexico’s 19 Pueblo nations, we support H.R. 4766, the Native 

American Language Preservation Act 2006, which will provide 

much needed support to Native American Immersion schools. The 

Native Language Act Amendment of 2006 will provide much needed support for native language emergent schools because it is, as 

you mentioned, Chairman McKeon, it is well proven that language 

immersion programs are effective ways to create fluent speakers in 

the native language. We urge the Committee to act on H.R. 4766 

and for Congress to pass H.R. 4766. H.R. 4766 would amend the 

Native American Language Act which was passed in 1990, amended in 1992 and will create a competitive grant program with the 

Department of Education to support many language immersion 

programs in our communities. 

I am sitting here thinking maybe one of the immersion initiatives could be as of recently the All Indian Pueblo Council and also 

11

the Indian Pueblo Council filed a Federal injunction against the 

Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Department of Education. You 

can consider that as some type of immersion because we are requesting certain things to take place that directly affect our young 

people. 

If taking things to Court is one way to do it, I think tribes now 

have the ability to do that. And they have shown that they will do 

it and they continue to do certain things that a lot of people think 

they were not able to do. 

So with that—I know I was only given 5 minutes—I thank you, 

Committee, for allowing us to speak. I am sure the rest of the 

panel will go into depth and detail on some of the things that I 

have mentioned to you today. I will stand for questions when the 

time is appropriate. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Shije follows:]

Prepared Statement of Amadeo Shije, Chairman, All Indian Pueblo Council 

My name is Amadeo Shije, Chairman of the All Indian Pueblo Council (AIPC) representing the 19 Pueblos in the State of New Mexico. 

I am writing on behalf of the All Indian Pueblo Council in support of H.R. 4766, 

the Native Language Act Amendments Act of 2006. This bill was introduced by Representative Heather Wilson to provide much needed support for Native language immersion schools. We strongly urge you to support the passage of this important legislation. 

The AIPC and the Native communities across the country are realizing a rapid 

decline in Native languages. It is estimated that only 20% of indigenous languages 

will remain viable by the year 2050. The AIPC and the Pueblos have made language 

recovery and preservation one of their highest priorities. It is proven that language 

immersion programs are one of the few effective ways to create fluent speakers in 

Native languages. Further, data shows that Native students who go through an immersion program perform substantially better academically than Native students 

who have not gone through such a program. For these reasons, it is urgent that 

Congress pass H.R. 4766 this session. 

By amending the Native American Language Act passed in 1990 and amended in 

1992, H.R. 4766 would create a competitive grant program within the Department 

of Education to support Native language immersion programs in Native communities that would be called language nests and language survival schools. The language nest grants would provide financial support to tribes and tribal entities to 

create and/or continue Native language immersion programs for children under the 

age of seven and their families. The language survival school grants would provide 

financial support to tribes and tribal entities to expand language nest programs to 

provide immersion programs for students in elementary and secondary schools. H.R. 

4766 would also allow for four demonstration programs based upon certain eligibility criteria. The demonstration programs would serve as technical experts to immersion programs, tribes, and the Department of Education as well as an information clearinghouse on immersion concepts and best practices. 

With so many Native languages and traditions becoming near the brink of extinction, the AIPC firmly believes that access to education through Native language immersion programs can be used to help preserve rather than replace Native culture. 

For the 19 Pueblos, the link between education, language and culture is fundamental and cannot be stressed enough as we preserve to maintain our identities. 

We appreciate your efforts to improve the education of Native children and thank 

you for your consideration of this important piece of legislation. 

Chairman MCKEON. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Wilson. 

STATEMENT OF RYAN WILSON, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL INDIAN 

EDUCATION ASSOCIATION 

Mr. WILSON. Good afternoon, Chairman McKeon, Vice Chairman 

Petri, Congresswoman Wilson. We want to give you a special 

12

thanks as well for introducing this Bill and Congressman Udall as 

well. Good afternoon and thank you again. 

As we understand it, the National Education Association, this is 

the first time in the history of the U.S. House of Representatives 

that there’s been a field hearing on Indian education and this critical issue of immersion so we applaud you in those efforts and we 

understand as well that in our annual legislative summit on a cold, 

snowy night in the heart of the winter the bill was introduced on 

February 14th. When Congresswoman Wilson introduced it, it really ushered in a joyous daybreak to a long, long night of apathy 

when it came to our native languages so you hold a special place 

in our heart and we want to acknowledge you for that. 

I’m going to elaborate a little more on our Chairman Shije and 

what he expressed and I want to kind of jump into that. So far—

when we look at—we are going to give you a little bit of an overview on some of the schools. And Dr. Sims is going to advance some 

of the critical data that you need to be hearing as well that will 

really accentuate where the schools place our young people academically. And I would like to give—what we want to say is a national perspective or overview on what some of the schools are 

doing now. 

But I want to start by also saying that today, we are at the beginning of a new century, the dawning of the 21st century. The 

United States of America and other countries around the world are 

supporting human rights, including the rights of indigenous minorities in places like Eastern Europe, the Middle East and other 

places in the world including Asia. 

The time has come now for equal recognition of the basic human 

rights of America’s native peoples and the control of our education, 

tribal control, and what chairman Shije was talking about, the 

issue with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. They are approaching 

them from the issue of consent and consultation and what that 

really means. This is what we want as tribal people is really respectful, heightened ability to have communication. By having this 

hearing today, this historic hearing, you are taking a very, very important step in doing so. 

America, as you are going to hear from the other panelists 

through a variety of policies, became the single largest investor in 

the destruction of these languages, and there’s a common theme 

that we hear so many times in Indian country when we approach 

our non Indian brothers that this should be taught in the home. 

This way of life belongs in your tribal community, in your village, 

wherever that may be, but in actuality, when you understand fully 

of history of what has happened, the trauma that has happened to 

these tribal communities, and that these languages, sacred languages, were put on trial, they were judged, they were convicted 

and they were jailed, and we were told—the only people here—to 

never stress our First Amendment rights, to never use our languages, have it outlawed, and here we are in 2006 everywhere we 

go we are told that, that they don’t belong in the schools. They 

don’t belong being taught this way. 

What we are saying here, everybody in the room, and you see 

this huge crowd that’s come out, that it really exemplifies what’s 

dear to our hearts. We are in a crisis and we are really saying that 

13

it belongs in our schools. Maybe not every school, but we have to 

create venues in our tribal communities where this can be taught, 

and we have to codify forever a place in the Department of Education to fund these schools. And that’s what this bill is about and 

that’s what this hearing is about and this is why we have come 

here. 

As I get more into what I’m going to say, it is not just the Pueblo 

people. We are so very happy to be here in Pueblo country. What 

they have done here. The All Indian Pueblo Council was the first 

tribal organization to endorse this bill. But subsequently other ones 

have come forward and say now is the time. And with one voice 

the National Congress of American Indians, affiliated tribes of 

Northwest Indians and we have a representative from the 

Muckleshoot Tribe from the Northwest that’s come down to join us 

as well. The Great Plains tribes, the Wyoming Montana Tribal 

Leaders Association, the large, land-based tribes which represent 

those tribes that control 60 percent of the entire land base in all 

of Indian country; the United Southeastern tribes, and of course, 

the National Indian Education Association, which has led us in this 

newly formed national alliance to save native languages, they have 

all come here, and I would like, with your permission, to submit 

letters of support and other supporting testimony for the congressional record. 

Chairman MCKEON. No objection, so ordered. 

Mr. WILSON. Thank you, Chairman. What we want to really say 

is, as Representative Udall expressed, now is the time. We can no 

longer, as we sit by and watch these languages erode at lightning 

speed move at horse and buggy pace to replace them and to revitalize them. This revitalization movement, some people said we 

want to isolate ourselves from the rest of America. That’s not true. 

That’s not accurate. What you are going to hear today from this 

distinguished panel is this isn’t an isolation movement, this is actually a movement to elevate the acquisition of English, to elevate 

our standards in academic progress and to really enjoy the full 

fruits of American dream, equity of opportunity and equality of opportunity. 

We are doing that in a way that’s very purposeful and meaningful, because if you look at it, and I want to take you back to 1968, 

and some in the room maybe are too young to remember this. I obviously am, but I was able to read about it, and in a very, very 

powerful way the U.S. Congress investigated for the first time ever 

the conditions of Indian children, and it was led by the Senate 

Committee on Indian Affairs, Robert Kennedy, and they went out 

into Indian country like what you are doing here. They went and 

traveled and visited our schools. 

They went into our homes, and they uncovered something that 

was appalling to mainstream America but it wasn’t to us because 

we live this amongst it. You though this, Chairman McKeon, because your brother did his mission in the poorest place in America, 

in Pine Ridge. But the American Indian that was documented 

through this report is systematically chronicled that we ranked at 

the bottom of every socio, every health, every education, housing 

and economic indicator that there was in America. And now here 

14

we are all these years later, 38 years later, and we still rank at 

the bottom of every one of those indicators. 

When we talk about Indian education, we gave up millions of 

acres of the richest land in the world in exchange for this continued 

inherent sovereignty and for these other things, and education was 

a piece of that. You heard yesterday it’s a trust responsibility. It’s 

a treaty right. And this is what we have come here to say is we 

want to express that right through these immersion schools as 

well. 

Because what we know, the current data shows us this, what is 

happening now, if we send 100 kids into kindergarten we know 

only 50 of them are going to graduate from high school. This is on 

average nationally. That wouldn’t be accepted anywhere in America, but that’s the reality of Indian country. 

Out of those 50 kids that graduate, only 20 of them might be 

ready to go on to a Division One college and be competitive academically. Out of that 20 that are even academically capable of 

doing that, maybe only 10 might apply, and even out of that ten 

only a handful are going to actually go on to higher education. I 

am talking non tribal colleges, but our mainstream universities. 

This is the reality that we face and we have to be honest about 

it in a way that says what is happening now, it isn’t working. No 

Child Left Behind was an incredible step in the right direction for 

accountability, for setting goals and for really making the Indian 

count for the first time in so many schools where he was invisible, 

and we applaud this Committee for the work they did in that. But 

the implementation of it hasn’t really quite been what we had 

thought. What we are asking you is to help close that achievement 

gap between promise and fulfillment. And this immersion school 

movement, this revitalization movement is really going to establish 

a new way of thinking, and as I said, through the Department of 

Education, to really impact for the first time since 1972 and that’s 

when the original Indian Education Act was passed. 

Chairman McKeon, your predecessor, I was in his office with 

some of our staff, and we were talking about the Indian Education 

Act and the statute as it applies to this elementary and second 

education act. I was explaining that we had a desire for you guys 

to come out to Indian country and have a field hearings during the 

whole reauthorization process. The Chief of Staff for your predecessor, Congresswoman Barnard, she was explaining there’s a lot 

of special interest groups that want to have inclusiveness and 

weigh in on reauthorization. I had to give her the explanation in 

a gentle way, Indian country is not a special interest group. 

Title 7 of the No Child Left Behind Act is the Indian Education 

Act. This is because we have a unique relationship with the Federal Government, and it’s based on those treaties, based on the 

trust responsibility. This is what we want to help you guys understand in a good way and this is what our needs are. And what we 

are saying, when we look at our young people who go to the Piegan 

Institute in Browning, Montana; our young children that go to the 

Akwesasne Freedom School in the St. Lawrence River in New 

York, Ahapunanaleo School in Hawaii; the Lower Kuskokwim 

School District up there in Bethel, Alaska; what is happening here, 

our neighbors in Navajo Country, fort Defiance, Rock Point, those 

15

young people that go there, what we are finding now, this emerging 

research, this emerging data, what it’s showing is beyond any 

shadow of a doubt when these schools are run properly, when 

there’s an investment—and none of these schools are receiving 

those same Federal dollars as these other tribal schools, grant 

schools, BIA schools or public schools that are housing students. 

Most of them are privately funded and they are outpacing every 

one of them. They are outpacing their counterparts going to the 

other schools. 

What we have to say collectively among us is what are we doing 

to our own children when we are not advancing these practices? 

When we know something works yet we systematically prevent 

them from having access we are cheating generation after generation of young people. We can’t do that anymore. We can’t sit idly 

by when we know something is working and not advance it to the 

forefront. That’s what the National Indian Education Association 

tried to do. 

We know how difficult it is for a Bill to get through Congress. 

But what we are saying is we have elders all over the country that 

are watching this bill. They are living and hanging on to life because they want to see this get passed. They want to have a tool, 

a vehicle, a conduit, so to speak, to pass our engendered way of life 

and languages on to our young people. 

And as I said earlier, those awesome challenges that face Indian 

country, and again, we know that. You heard about the meth epidemic yesterday. We all know about our alcoholism. We know 

about our diabetes, all these things, the high school dropout rate, 

the truancy, the low academic standards in the schools. What this 

does is this creates a commitment to excellent, because that’s what 

our way of life is. It’s an excellent way of life. It creates healthy 

minds. It creates young people that have assets, that are resilient 

and that are achieving because they are biculturally competent. 

We don’t just want to reach the same standards. They use that 

word ‘‘closing the achievement gap.’’ We don’t want to just close the 

achievement gap. We want our young people to be the most educated people in America, not just equal to our non Indian brothers. 

We want them to be the most educated people in America, and that 

will never come through the exclusive dominance of the English 

language. It will come through biculturally competent people. We 

have to create native thinkers and learners who have conquered 

the language, not Indian children who have been conquered by the 

English language. That comes from our own way of life and promoting that. 

So Chairman, I thank you again this historic day. I thank you 

for inviting me to give testimony and I will be here as well to answer any questions that you may have, the Committee. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Wilson follows:]

Prepared Statement of Ryan Wilson, President of the National Indian 

Education Association 

Good afternoon, Chairman McKeon, Vice-Chairman Petri, Representative Wilson, 

and Representative Udall. My name is Ryan Wilson, President of the National Indian Education Association (NIEA) located in Washington, D.C. I am honored to be 

here to testify today before this Committee to provide the views of NIEA on the importance and benefits of Native language immersion programs. 

16

Before I begin, I would like to take this moment to thank you for holding this 

important hearing on preserving Native languages. We appreciate the dedication to 

this serious issue you show by the fact that you are here—far away from Washington, D.C.—to seek our views and to see Indian Country first hand. I also want 

to thank, in particular, Representative Wilson for introducing H.R. 4766 and for her 

leadership in working with Native communities to provide them with much needed 

resources to save our precious languages. 

The National Indian Education Association (NIEA) is the oldest and largest Native education advocacy organization. Founded in 1969, NIEA has over 3,000 members. Its membership is comprised of American Indian, Alaska Native and Native 

Hawaiian educators, tribal leaders, school administrators, teachers, parents, and 

students. NIEA’s membership also includes tribal governments located across the 

country. NIEA focuses its advocacy on the unique educational and culturally-related 

academic needs of Native students. Also, NIEA works to ensure that the federal government upholds its responsibility for the education of American Indians. The trust 

relationship of the United States includes the responsibility to ensure educational 

quality and access. NIEA works with all tribes to support innovative educational approaches. 

You have requested that my testimony focus on the importance of preserving Native languages and on Native language immersion programs. Further, you have requested that I discuss the benefits of language immersion programs, describe what 

Native communities are currently doing to encourage such programs, and to provide 

NIEA’s views on H.R. 4766, the Native American Languages Preservation Act of 

2006. I hope that you find that my testimony provides you with the information that 

you seek. 

Importance of Preserving Native Languages 

For Native people in the United States, our cultural beliefs, traditions, social 

structures, heritage, and governance systems depend on our Native languages. We 

conduct our ceremonies, prayers, stories, songs, and dances in our Native languages 

just as we have done since the beginning of time. Our languages connect us to our 

ancestors, our traditional ways of life, and our histories. For us, the survival of our 

cultures and identities is inextricably linked to the survival of our languages. If our 

languages die, then it is inevitable that our cultures will die next. 

The United States, in one of its darker moments in history, adopted an 

assimilationist policy where it pro-actively sought to eradicate Native languages by 

harshly forbidding the speaking of Native languages at BIA schools. The United 

States adopted this policy because it knew that people disconnected from their languages were more apt to lose their cultural identities and that a society’s culture 

more quickly dies if the language dies. One linguist stated in his research that 

‘Lieutenant Richard Pratt, architect of the BIA school system, summed up its educational philosophy succinctly: ‘‘Kill the Indian * * * and save the man.’’ ’1

Ms. Rita Coosewoon, Language Instructor, Comanche Nation College and Elgin 

High School, very eloquently described the deep impact that the United States’ 

assimilationist policies had on her personally and why these policies have hastened 

the deterioration of our Native languages. At a Senate Indian Affairs Committee’s 

hearing on Native language immersion schools on May 15, 2003, she stated: 

When I was old enough to begin my formal education I was taken to Fort Sill 

Indian Boarding School. Because I was reared by my grandparents, the only language I was exposed to was Comanche. There at the school we were forbidden to 

speak our language. We were severely punished if we were caught speaking anything other than English. So, at an early age I was being taught that my language 

was a hindrance to me. Consequently, I didn’t teach my own children to speak the 

language. As I grew older I realized the mistake, I along with others had made. We 

robbed them of their culture and now we are struggling to teach them what we can.2

Native languages are one of the treasures of this country’s heritage and history. 

Native American languages have contributed to the rich fabric of what makes our 

country so great. Many states, cities, towns, streets, rivers, and other geographical 

places in our country are Native words. For example, the name ‘‘Connecticut’’ means 

‘‘beside the long tidal river’’ in Mohican; the name ‘‘Oklahoma’’ means ‘‘red people’’ 

in Choctaw; the name ‘‘Alaska’’ means ‘‘great land’’ or ‘‘that which the sea breaks 

against’’ in Aleut; the name ‘‘Chicago’’ means ‘‘garlic field’’ in Algonquian; the name 

‘‘Minnesota’’ means ‘‘sky-tinted water’’ in Dakota; the name ‘‘Malibu’’ is believed to 

derive from the Chumash Indians; the name ‘‘Manhattan’’ is believed to mean ‘‘isolated thing in water’’ in Algonquian; the name ‘‘Missouri’’ means ‘‘town of large canoes’’ and is believed to derive from the Missouria tribe; the name ‘‘Nebraska’’ 

means ‘‘flat water’’ in Otoe; the name ‘‘Tahoe’’ means ‘‘big water’’ in Washoe; and 

17

the list goes on and on.3 It would be a shame to continue to lose the languages from 

where these words are derived. 

Indeed, these languages have played a vital role in protecting our country in 

times of war. In World Wars I and II, many brave Native Americans performed the 

role of code talkers, using a code language derived from Native languages. This ensured secure and rapid communication of critical information on the battlefield. We 

should honor these patriots by protecting their languages that helped protect this 

great country. Recently, NIEA held a Native Languages Legislative Summit in 

Washington, D.C. Navajo and Lakota Code Talkers from New Mexico, Arizona, and 

South Dakota participated along with many Members of Congress and language immersion practitioners. The passion for protecting Native languages was palpable at 

the Summit; and, when the Code Talkers spoke about their experiences in the military and their love for their language in the midst of discriminatory treatment, everyone who was there was energized to do all that they could to preserve these languages. 

Our Native languages are not spoken anywhere else in the world; and, if they are 

not preserved, then they will disappear forever. In Native communities across the 

country, Native languages are in rapid decline. Sadly, many tribes have already lost 

their languages. Language scholars estimate that there were approximately 300 languages spoken in North America prior to the arrival of Columbus.4 Some project 

that only twenty indigenous languages will remain viable by the year 2050.5 According to the 2000 U.S. Census, out of a population of 4.1 million American Indians 

and Native Alaskans, only 32.3% report speaking a language other than English at 

home. Given the rapid pace of deterioration of Native languages, it is a race against 

the clock to save Native languages. Therefore, Native language recovery is one of 

NIEA’s highest priorities. 

As one linguist stated, ‘‘Every language loss causes serious damage to individual 

and group identity, for it destroys a sense of self-worth, limits human potential and 

complicates efforts to solve problems in the community.’’ 6 Another linguist stated, 

‘Each language is a unique tool for analyzing and synthesizing the world, incorporating the knowledge and values of a speech community. Linguistic ‘‘categories 

[including] number, gender, case, tense, mode, voice, ‘aspect’ and a host of others 

* * * are not so much discovered in experience as imposed upon it.’’ Thus to lose 

such a tool is to ‘‘forget’’ a way of constructing reality, to blot out a perspective 

evolved over many generations. The less variety in language, the less variety in 

ideas.’7

Native Language Immersion Programs and the Benefits of These Programs 

The key to stemming the loss of Native American languages is by significantly 

increasing support for Native American language immersion schools and other immersion programs. It is well proven that language immersion schools are one of the 

few effective ways to create fluent speakers in Native languages.8 For example, in 

Fort Defiance, Arizona, the students that participated in the Navajo immersion program did considerably better on the tests of Navajo language ability and tested as 

well in English proficiency as the English-only students. The resulting impact is 

that the Navajo immersion students were gaining control of their own language 

with no loss to their knowledge of English. Meanwhile, the English-only students 

were minimally competent in English, and scoring at lower levels than they previously scored in Navajo competency.9

Native language immersion is a way of learning language that concentrates on 

communication exclusively in a Native language. Immersion teachers provide instruction on all topics with the Native language being the learning medium. Also, 

immersion programs are typically performed in the context of the culture of the 

community. Linguists estimate that a time frame of 4 to 7 years is needed to develop age appropriate levels of academic proficiency in a second language.10 There 

are many grassroots programs designed to revitalize Native languages throughout 

tribal schools, communities, and families; but these efforts are fragmented and inadequately funded. 

In addition to developing fluent speakers, language immersion schools have other 

remarkable benefits. Studies and analyses are showing that Native language immersion programs provide a proven method in decreasing Native drop-out rates and 

in increasing educational attainment.11 Keeping students interested in school is a 

challenging prospect for all educators and parents. For many Native students living 

in rural and isolated areas, if subjects are taught in non-cultural pedagogies and 

removed from their community’s perspectives, then often Native students lose interest in school due to the non-relevance of the materials to their lives and identities. 

Immersion programs are facilitating academic achievement of Native students in a 

wide array of subject areas, including math, reading, and science as well as in the 

18

areas of arts and languages. Also, these programs are valuable in fostering selfawareness, self-esteem, social growth, and problem solving skills, which are crucial 

in developing confident individuals who can tackle life’s challenges. 

One study reported that, while Native American children and youth have exhibited stagnant educational achievement (and have the poorest achievement of all 

American ethnic groups), Native language immersion has demonstrated remarkable 

promise in participants’ educational achievement and in improving cognitive abilities.12 Another study reported that solid data from the immersion school experience 

indicates that language immersion students experience greater success in school 

measured by consistent improvement on local and national measures of achievement.13 For example, in Hawaii, there are twenty-two public schools either with immersion streams or with entire immersion curriculum. These schools have approximately 1700 students enrolled that outperform the average Native Hawaiian student in Hawaii public schools.14 While data specific to Native American language 

immersions schools is continuing to be compiled, national studies from both the public and private sectors emphasize the positive impact of language studies on educational achievement.15

Below are a few more examples of successful immersion schools where the students are doing better than their counterparts who are not in immersion programs. 

The Piegan Institute is located in Browning, Montana, and serves students in 

grades K though 8 through instruction in the Blackfeet language. Piegan Institute 

programs provide an integrated approach that encompasses social, intellectual, academic, and linguistic dimensions. The focus throughout is on making connections 

across the various contexts of a learner’s experience, the classroom, the family, the 

community and what language means for a learner in each of these contexts. 

The Akwesasne Freedom School is located on the St. Lawrence River in upstate 

New York and is an independent elementary school for grades pre-K through 8 run 

by the Mohawk Nation. The school was founded in 1979 by Mohawk parents concerned that their language and culture would slowly die. In 1985, a Mohawk language immersion program was begun. The Mohawk ‘‘Thanksgiving Address,’’ which 

teaches gratitude to the earth and everything on it, is used as a curriculum base. 

Students study reading, writing, math, science, history and the Mohawk ceremonial 

cycle. The Akwesasne Freedom School combines solid academics with a strong foundation in Mohawk culture. 

In an effort to reverse language loss, the Lower Kuskokwim School District, located in western Alaska, began a Yup’ik Immersion program in Bethel under the 

state’s Language Other than English as a Second Language program option. Thirtytwo kindergarten children initially enrolled in this program. Today, the program has 

expanded to several villages and offers both Two-Way Immersion and Full Early Immersion programs. However, these programs are limited by materials, teachers, and 

financial resources while dealing with the continuing pressure to meet the standards of No Child Left Behind. 

The successes of Native language immersion schools and programs is demonstrated by many of the language schools meeting the standards outlined in No 

Child Left Behind (NCLB) through Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and the students’ abilities to outperform their Native counterparts in non-immersion schools. 

The seven schools that met AYP in 2004 in the Lower Kuskokwim School District 

all had strong Yup’ik language and culture programs, especially at the primary levels. In 2005, two schools, one with a Yup’ik language Development Program and one 

with an early immersion program, met AYP for the second year.16 This information 

demonstrates that the standards for the Yup’ik program are high and the Yup’ik 

instruction at the primary level results in strong academic proficiency in reading, 

writing, and math. The Yup’ik example is just one of many that shows the positive 

impact Native language programs have on student achievement. 

Also, in northern Arizona, the two language programs at the Rock Point Community School and the Navajo immersion program at Fort Defiance Elementary School 

have proven that instruction in Native languages fosters Native student achievement.17 At the Rock Point Community School, where the emphasis on instruction 

is on Navajo language and thought, the students performed better than comparable 

students in nearby schools at all grade levels, ‘‘and the margin of differences tended 

to be larger at each succeeding grade.’’ 18 At the Fort Defiance Elementary School, 

where kindergarten and first grade are taught entirely in Navajo with increased instruction in English in second through fifth grades, the students performed considerably better on local assessments of writing-in-English and the math portion of 

standardized tests than their counterparts. 

Recognizing the significant deterioration of Native languages, many Native communities across the country are implementing wonderful language immersion programs through either school-based or community-based programs, but many are 

19

struggling due to limited financial means. Below is the list of Native immersion programs of which NIEA is aware. Given that Native immersion efforts are grassrootsbased, there is no one repository for this information. Therefore, this list is not exhaustive.

Akwesasne Freedom School, Rooseveltown, NY 

Apache Tribe of Oklahoma, Anadarko, OK 

Native American Studies Department, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 

Bahweting Elementary School, Sault Ste. Marie, MI 

Bay Mills Community College, Brimley, MI 

Blackfeet Community College, Browning, MT 

Cannisbrulee Native American Center of the Gulf South, Kenner, LA 

Catawba Cultural Preservation Project, Rock Hill, SC 

Center for Gifted and Talented Native Hawaiian Children, Hilo, HI 

Cherokee Nation Cultural Center, Tahlequah, OK 

Cheyenne River Community College, Lakota Studies, Eagle Butte, SD 

Cheyenne Eagle Butte Schools, Lakota Language Program, Eagle Butte, SD 

Chickasaw Nation of Oklahoma, Tishomingo, OK 

Dean C. Jackson Center, Navajo Language Curriculum, Chinle, AZ 

Chitimacha Tribe, Cultural Education Department, Charenton, LA 

Choctaw Nation Government Offices, Choctaw Language Dept., Durant, OK 

Cocopah Language Program c/o Cocopah Museum, Somerton, AZ 

Comanche Language and Cultural Committee, Lawton, OK 

Comanche Preschool Language Program, Lawton, OK 

Coushatta Tribe, Elton, LA 

Delaware Indian Language Project, Bartlesville, OK 

Dine’ Community College, Navajo Language Program, Tsaile, AZ 

Dine’ Cultural Language and Community Services, Window Rock, AZ 

Dine’ Nation Language Program, Window Rock, AZ 

Dull Knife Memorial College, Lame Deer, MT 

Euchee Language Class, Sapulpa, OK 

Fond du Lac Tribal and Community College, Cloquet, MN 

Ft. Belknap Community College, Gros Ventre & Assiniboine Languages, Harlem, 

MT 

Hale Kuamo’o, Center for Hawaiian Languages and Culture, University of Hawaii, 

Hilo, HI 

Hoopa Languages Program, Hoopa, CA 

Little Big Horn Community College, Crow Studies Department, Crow Agency, MT 

Little Hoop Community College, Fort Trotten, ND 

Loyal Shawnee of Cherokee Nation, Psaslagi Cultural Center Language Project, 

Tahlequah, OK 

Marty Indian School, Marty, SD 

Mashpee Wampanoag Tribal Council, Wampanoag Language Development Committee, Mashpee, MA 

Menominee Language Instructor/Programs, Native American Educational Services 

(NAES) College, Keshena, WI 

Mescalero High School , Mescalero, NM 

Miami Tribe of Oklahoma, Miami, OK 

Muskogee Creek Nation of Oklahoma, Okmulgee, OK 

Nebraska Indian Community College, Macy, NE 

Northern Ute Tribe Education Department, Fort Duchesne, UT 

Northwest Indian College, Bellingham, WA 

Oasis Primary School, Sells, AZ 

Oglala Lakota College, Kyle, SD 

Ojibwe Mekana, Ojibwe Language Instruction, Duluth, MN 

Oneida Tribal High School, Oneida, WI 

Peach Springs School District, Bilingual Academic Excellence Program, Peach 

Springs, AZ 

Piegan Institute, Blackfeet Language Program, Browning, MT 

Project Tradition and Technology, Peach Springs, AZ 

Pueblo of Acoma, Sky City Community College, Acoma, NM 

Pueblo of Acoma, Acoma Language Retention Project, Acoma, NM 

Pueblo of Cochiti, Cochiti Language Preservation Program, Cochiti, NM 

Pueblo of Isleta del Sur, El Paso, TX 

Pueblo of Nambe, Naminbi Ecocultural Language Program, Nambe Pueblo, NM 

Pueblo of Picuris, Penasco, NM 

Pojoaque Language Program, Poeh Cultural Center, Sante Fe, NM 

Pueblo of San Juan, Ohkay Owingeh Community College,San Juan Pueblo, NM 

Pueblo of Sandia, Bernalillo, NM 

20

Pueblo of Santa Ana, Department of Education, Bernalillo, NM 

Pueblo Santa Clara, 

Espanola, NM 

Pueblo of Taos, Taos Day School, Taos, NM 

Pueblo of Tesuque, Education Office, Santa Fe, NM 

Pueblo of Zia, Zia Day School, Zia, NM 

Pueblo of Zia, Zia Language Preservation and Enhancement Program, Zia Pueblo, 

NM 

Pueblo of Zuni, Zuni Public School District, Zuni, NM 

Puyallup Tribe, Chief Leschi School Bilingual Program, Puyallup, WA 

Rock Point Community School, Rock Point, AZ 

San Ildefonso Day School, Tewa Language Program, Santa Fe, NM 

Sahaptin Language Department, Heritage College, Toppenish, WA 

Salish Kootenai College, Pablo, MT 

San Carlos High School, Apache Language and History, San Carlos, AZ 

Sanders Unified School District, Sanders, AZ 

Sealaska Heritage Foundation, Juneau, AK 

Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, Seminole Language Curriculum, Wewoka, OK 

Seneca Language and Culture Program, Salamanca, NY 

Sinte Gleska UniversityLakota Studies Program, Mission, SD 

Sisseton Wahpeton Community College 

Dakota Studies Program, Agency Village, Sisseton, SD 

Waadookodaading Ojibwe Language Program, Hayward, WI 

Yup’ik Immersion Program, Lower Kuskokwim School District, Bethel, AK

Also, please find attached to this testimony a bibliography of materials discussing 

Native language immersion programs. 

Views on H.R. 4766

NIEA strongly supports H.R. 4766 and urges the Committee to mark it up when 

it returns from August recess. Further, NIEA urges the Congress to enact this legislation this session. We realize that the legislative session is shortly coming to a 

close, but our languages are quickly dying out. 

H.R. 4766 would assist in the preservation of our Native languages while also providing a resource to our Native students to help them stay motivated in school, 

achieve academically, and gain greater self-esteem and confidence. H.R. 4766 would 

do this by amending the Native American Languages Act to create a competitive 

grant program within the Department of Education to support Native language immersion programs called language nests and language survival schools. The language immersion grants would provide financial support to tribes, Native American 

language educational organizations, Native American language colleges, and other 

Native educational entities to create and/or continue Native language immersion 

programs for children and students under the age of seven and in elementary and 

secondary school. 

Language immersion costs money, and most Native communities have very limited funds. NIEA believes that the cost for this new grant program would be in the 

range of $8 million. Of course, if more could be appropriated, then the better. This 

funding would allow for firmer financial footing for existing language immersion 

programs and would provide encouragement for others to begin. With this federal 

support, we can slow down and hopefully reverse the loss of our Native languages 

and culture. 

Currently, the Native American Languages Act is administered by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Native Americans (ANA) 

and provides for a very broad grant program for Native language projects that span 

the spectrum from recording and compiling information on extinct Native languages 

to teaching Native languages. This grant program provides minimal support for language immersion programs. Over the past few years, ANA’s funding has been flatlined at $44 million with less than 10% of this funding going toward language immersion programs, which include summer and seasonal camps, weekend retreats 

and seminars, and some year-round schools. This broad language grant program at 

ANA is one of several grant programs that ANA administers. At ANA, language 

grant applications must compete against ANA’s other grant programs, including social and economic development, environmental regulatory enhancement, healthy 

marriages, and environmental mitigation. Further, the length of these grants varies 

from 1 to 3 years, which is not enough time to develop a successful language immersion nest or school. 

NIEA believes that the language immersion grant program set forth in H.R. 4766 

would be appropriately administered by the Department of Education in its Office 

of Indian Education given that it is the federal agency that administers Native eduVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:58 Nov 06, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\DOCS\FC\8-31-06\HED243.000 EDUWK PsN: DICK
21

cation and can provide stability for an immersion nest or school through its grant 

funding stream and other resources. Also, the language nests and survivor schools 

squarely fit within the purpose of Title VII of No Child Left Behind to provide for 

the ‘‘unique and culturally related academic needs of Indian students.’’ As you know, 

No Child Left Behind is administered by the Department of Education. 

For the demonstration program provision contained in Section 3 of H.R. 4766, 

NIEA recommends that the demonstration program participants be selected through 

a competitive grant process, such as the one set forth in S. 2674. 

Conclusion 

Saving our Native languages is synonymous with preserving our Native culture 

and identities. The rapid loss of Native languages affects not only Native people but 

also all Americans. Native people and their languages are an integral part of America’s history and heritage. We urge the Congress to take immediate action to help 

us preserve our languages for future generations. Further, improving the academic 

achievement and personal growth of our Native children benefits all Americans 

today and in the future. We look forward to working with you to enact H.R. 4766. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ARTICLES AND RESEARCH DISCUSSING NATIVE LANGUAGE IMMERSION

Alaska Standards for Culturally-Responsive Schools. Fairbanks, AK: University of 

Alaska, 1998. 

Benjamin, R., Pecos, R., Romero, M.E. (1996) Language Revitalization Efforts in the 

Pueblo de Cochiti: Becoming literate in an Oral Society. In Nancy Hornberger 

(Ed.) Indigenous literacies in the Americas: Language Planning from the Bottom Up. Berlin/New York: Mouton. 

Blair, Heather, John Janvier, Sally Rice, and Valerie Wood. Daghida: Cold Lake 

First Nation Works Towards Dene Language Revitalization. Flagstaff, AZ: 

Northern Arizona University, 2002. 

Blue Arm, Marion. Assessing Lakota Language Issues on the Cheyenne River Reservation. Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University, 2002. 

Christie, Ella and Marilyn Cochran, Dora Dunn, Lula Elk, Ed Fields, JoAnn Fields, 

Tracy Hirata-Edds, Anna Huckaby, Lizette Peter, Margaret Raymond, Hastings 

Shade, Gloria Sly, George Wickliffe and Akira Yamamoto. Assessing the Impact 

of Total Immersion on Cherokee Language Revitalization: A Culturally Responsive, Participatory Approach. Flagstaff, NM: Northern Arizona University, 2003. 

Crawford, J. Bilingual Education: History, Politics, Theory and Practice. (4th Ed.) 

Bilingual Education Services: Los Angeles. 1999. 

Crawford, James, Endangered Native American Languages: What Is to Be Done, 

and Why? Reprinted in Language and Politics in the U.S. and Canada: Myths 

and Realities, ed. Thomas Ricento and Barbara Burnaby (Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998). 

Deyhle, Donna and Karen Swisher. ‘‘Research in American Indian Education: from 

assimilation to self-determination.’’ Review of Research in Education. Vol. 22 

(1997): 113-194. 

Demmert, William G. Improving Academic Performance Among Native American 

Children. Bellingham, Washington: Western Washington University, 2004. 

Demmert, William G. and John C. Townsend. A review of the research literature 

on the influences of culturally based education on the academic performance of 

Native American students. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 2003. 

Dick, Galena Sells and Teresa McCarty. Mother Tongue Literacy and Language Renewal: The case of the Navajo. Tuscon, AZ: University of Arizona, 1996. 

Ditmar, Selena, Douglas R. Parks, Julia Kushner, Wallace Hooper, Francis Flavin 

and Delilah Yellow Bird. ‘‘Documenting and Maintaining Native American Languages for the 21st Century: The Indiana University Model.’’ Revitalizing Indigenous Languages. Ed. Jon Reyhner. Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University, 

1999. 

Ebmeier, Howard, Darrell Kipp, Paul Markham and John Monahan. Evaluation of 

the Inupiaq Immersion Program. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas, 2000. 

Estes, James, How Many Indigenous American Languages are Spoken in the United 

States? By how many speakers? National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. www.ncbe.gwu.edu. 

Greymorning, Stephen. ‘‘Going Beyond Words: The Arapaho Immersion Program.’’ 

Teaching Indigenous Languages. Ed. Jon Rehyner. Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University, 1997. 

Greymorning, Stephen. ‘‘Running the Gauntlet of an Indigenous Language Program.’’ Revitalizing Indigenous Languages. Retrieved on July 6, 2006 from 

http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/?jar/RIL—2.html. 

22

Guanish, George and Bill Jancewicz, Marguerite MacKenzie, and Silas Nabinicaboo. 

Building a Community Language Development Team with Quebec Naskapi. 

Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University, 2002. 

Harrison, Barbara. ‘‘Te Wharekura o Rakaumangamanga: The Development of an 

Indigenous Language Immersion School.’’ Bilingual Research Journal. Volume 

22:2, 3, & 4 Spring, Summer, & Fall. (1998) 

Hartley, Elizabeth and Pam Johnson. ‘‘Toward a community-based transition to a 

Yup’ik first language (immersion) program with ESL component.’’ The Bilingual 

Research Journal. Summer/Fall 1995, Vol. 19, Nos. 3 & 4, pp. 571-585, (1995). 

Holm, A. & Holm, W. (1995). Navajo language education: Retrospect and prospects. 

Bilingual Research Journal, 19(1). 

Jacobs, K.A. ‘‘A chronology of Mohawk language instruction at Kahnawa`:ke.’’ Eds. 

Grenoble. L.A. and L.J. Whaley. Endangered Languages: Language Loss and 

Community Response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. 

Johnston, Bill. ‘‘The Rise and Fall of a Dakota Immersion Pre-School.’’ Journal of 

Multilingual and Multicultural Development. Vol. 9, No. 3. (2002) 195-213. 

Kipp, Darrell R. Encouragement, Guidance, Insights, and Lessons Learned for Native Language Activists Developing Their Own Tribal Language Programs. 

Browning, MT: Piegan Institute, 2000. 

Kula Kaiapuni O Anuenue School. Honolulu, HI: Planning and Evaluation Office, 

Office of the Superintendent. Retrieved June 26, 2006 from http://

arch.k12.hi.us/pdf/ssir/2004/Honolulu/SSIR103-1.pdf. 

Linn, Mary S., Tessie Naranjo, Sheilah Nicholas, Ine ́e Slaughter, Akira Yamamoto, 

and Ofelia Zepeda. Awakening the Languages: Challenges of Enduring Language Programs: Field reports from 15 Programs from Arizona, New Mexico and 

Oklahoma. Santa Fe, NM: Indigenous Language Institute, 2002. 

Lipka, Jerry. Schooling for Self-Determination: Research on the Effects of Including 

Native Language and Culture in the Schools. (2002) Retrieved July 6, 2006 from 

http://www.ael.org/snaps/edorc01-12.htm. 

Malone, Dennis. ‘‘Developing Curriculum Materials for Endangered Language Education: Lessons from the Field.’’ International Journal of Bilingual Education 

and Bilingualism. Vol. 6, No. 5. (2003): 332-348. 

McCarty, Teresa and Lucille Watahomigie. Indigenous Community-based language 

education in the USA. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona, 1998. 

Native Hawaiian Early Education, Development and Care. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs Hearing transcript. Report No. Senate-Hrg-107-451. (2002). 

Pease-Pretty On Top, Janine. Native Language Immersion: Innovative Native Education for Children and Families. Denver: American Indian College Fund. 2003. 

Reardon, Nita, & Williams, Bev. (2006). ‘‘Yup’ik Language Programs at Lower 

Kuskokwim School District, Bethel, Alaska.’’ The Journal of American Indian 

Education, Volume 45, Issue 2. 

Rehyner, Jon. ‘‘Identity, Schooling and Success.’’ NABE News. Vol. 25, No. 4. (2002). 

Rehyner, Jon. ‘‘Place- and Community-Based Curriculum for High School English 

Language Learners.’’ NABE News. Vol. 25, No.3. (2002) 23-24. 

Stiles, Dawn B. ‘‘Four Successful Indigenous Language Programs.’’ Teaching Indigenous Language Programs. Ed. John Rehyner. Flagstaff, NM: Northern Arizona 

University, 1997. 

Sugarmen, Julie and Howard, Liz. ‘‘Two Way Immersion Shows Promising Results: 

Findings of a New Study.’’ Center for Applied Linguistics, ERIC/CLL Language 

Link. ERIC Clearinghouse on Language and Linguistics: Washington, DC. September 2001. 

Toulouse, Pamela Rose. Sagamok Anishinawbek: The Decision Makers and Varying 

Conceptions of Cultural Inclusion at Beedaban School. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, 2001. 

Walsh, Michael. Teaching NSWs Indigenous Languages Lessons from Elsewhere. 

Sydney, Australia: University of Sydney, 2002. 

ENDNOTES

1 Crawford, James, ‘‘Endangered Native American Languages: What Is to Be Done, and 

Why?,’’ reprinted in Language and Politics in the U.S. and Canada: Myths and Realities, ed. 

Thomas Ricento and Barbara Burnaby (Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998) 

(quoting Pratt, R.H. (1973). Official report of the nineteenth annual Conference of Charities and 

Correction [1892], in F.P. Prucha (Ed.), Americanizing the American Indians: Writings by the 

‘‘Friends of the Indian,’’ 1880-1900 (pp. 260-71). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press). 2Testimony of Rita Coosewoon, Hearing before the Committee on Indian Affairs, United 

States Senate, 108th Congress, first session, on S. 575, to Amend the Native American Languages Act to Provide for the Support of Native American Language Survival Schools, May 15, 

2003, p. 75. 

23

3 Brunner, Borgna, American Indian Place Names, Pearson Education publishing as Infoplease 

(2006), http://print.infoplease.com (taken from O Brave New Words! Native American 

Loanwords in Current English, Charles L. Cutler). 4 Estes, James, How Many Indigenous American Languages are Spoken in the United States? 

By how many speakers? National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. www.ncbe.gwu.edu. 5 Crawford, J. Bilingual Education: History, Politics, Theory and Practice. (4th Ed.) Bilingual 

Education Services: Los Angeles. 1999. 6Pease—Pretty on Top, Janine. Native American Language Immersion: Innovative Native 

Education for Children & Families. American Indian College Fund: Denver, Colorado. 2003, p. 

18. 7 Crawford, James, ‘‘Endangered Native American Languages: What Is to Be Done, and Why?’’ 

Reprinted in Language and Politics in the U.S. and Canada: Myths and Realities, ed. Thomas 

Ricento and Barbara Burnaby (Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998) (quoting 

Sapir, E. (1931). ‘‘Conceptual Strategies in Primitive Languages.’’ Science, 74, 578). 8 Benjamin, R., Pecos, R., Romero, M.E. (1996) Language Revitalization Efforts in the Pueblo 

de Cochiti: Becoming literate in an Oral Society. In Nancy Hornberger (Ed.) Indigenous literacies in the Americas: Language Planning from the Bottom Up. Berlin/New York: Mouton; see 

also Johnson, K. & Swain, M. (1997). Immersion education: International perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Stiles, D.B. (1997). ‘‘Four Successful Indigenous Language 

Programs,’’ In J. Reyhner (Ed.), Teaching Indigenous Languages, pp. 248-262. Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University. 9 Holm A., Holm, W. (1995). ‘‘Navajo language education: Retrospects and prospects.’’ Bilingual 

Research Journal, 19(1), p.150. 10Testimony of Dr. Teresa McCarty, Interim Dean, College of Education, University of Arizona, and Professor of Language, Reading and Culture, Co-Director, American Indian Language 

Development Institute, Hearing before the Committee on Indian Affairs, United States Senate, 

108th Congress, first session, on S. 575, to Amend the Native American Languages Act to Provide for the Support of Native American Language Survival Schools, May 15, 2003, p. 122. 11Pease—Pretty on Top, Janine. Native American Language Immersion: Innovative Native 

Education for Children & Families. American Indian College Fund: Denver, Colorado. 2003, p. 

9. 12Pease—Pretty on Top, Janine. Native American Language Immersion: Innovative Native 

Education for Children & Families. American Indian College Fund: Denver, Colorado. 2003. 13McCarty, Teresa L. and Dick, Galena Sells. ‘‘Mother Tongue Literacy and Language Renewal: The Case of the Navajo.’’ Proceedings of the 1996 World Conference on Literacy. University of Arizona: Tucson, AZ. 1996, pp. 5-6. 14Op. cit. Pease- Pretty on Top. 2003, p.16, Aha Punana Leo. Our Language: e ola ka olelo 

Hawaii- the Hawaiian language shall live. Website, www.ahapunanaleo.org/HTML/

OL,htm.Pp.6-7. 15Sugarmen, Julie and Howard, Liz. Two Way Immersion Shows Promising Results: Findings 

of a New Study. Center for Applied Linguistics, ERIC/CLL Language Link. ERIC Clearinghouse 

on Language and Linguistics: Washington, DC. September 2001, p. 2-3. 16 Reardon, Nita, & Williams, Bev. (2006). ‘‘Yup’ik Language Programs at Lower Kuskokwim 

School District, Bethel, Alaska.’’ The Journal of American Indian Education, Volume 45, Issue 

2, p. 40. 17 Holm, A. & Holm, W. (1995). ‘‘Navajo language education: Retrospect and prospects.’’ Bilingual Research Journal, 19(1), p. 141-167. 18 Id. at p. 148. 

Chairman MCKEON. Thank you very much. Those were eloquent 

words. The problem is, if all of you take that much time, we are 

going to run out of time before we have time to finish. But let’s 

hear now from Dr. Sims. 

STATEMENT OF CHRISTINE SIMS, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE, LITERACY AND SOCIOCULTURAL 

STUDIES, COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF NEW 

MEXICO 

Ms. SIMS. [Introduction spoken in Native American language.] 

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman McKeon and members of the committee. I am getting an echo for some reason. I will go ahead and 

go on. Mr. Chairman, I am thankful for the opportunity to come 

and speak before you today. 

Chairman MCKEON. Try holding it back just a little. 

Ms. SIMS. Now can you hear me? My name is Christine Sims. I 

am Assistant Professor at the University of New Mexico in the College of Education. I am one of six native faculty in our department. 

We are part of a growing institute called the Institute for American 

24

Indian Education. We are dedicated to the promotion of indigenous 

leadership and research in education and we seek to increase the 

capacity of American Indian tribes with regard to the development, 

expansion and improving the delivery of instructional services that 

address the educational and linguistic needs of American Indian 

children. 

I would like to acknowledge those folks that are sitting in the audience today, many of whom are not only from the University of 

New Mexico but as well many of our own tribal leaders, our elders, 

our parents are here, students are here. All of them are here in 

support of this very important meeting and also in support of the 

bills that are being proposed here. 

I would like to also say that in coming to New Mexico, as Chairman Shije mentioned has before, we take great pride in knowing 

that our villages here are some of the oldest continuously inhabited 

villages in all of the United States and many of the language communities that you see represented here are representative of languages that have been here hundreds and perhaps thousands of 

years. And our concern for the survival of languages comes from 

the fact that many of our communities, as Mr. Shije alluded to, are 

still very much dependent on an oral-based tradition where many 

of the languages aren’t necessarily written. But in carrying on an 

oral tradition, many of the values, the beliefs, our own indigenous 

forms of education, are transmitted through language, and so for 

communities like ours especially, we have a special concern that 

children continue to learn these languages, even throughout their 

school years. 

I would like to note that this hearing comes at an especially significant time in our history for a couple reasons. First of all, it’s 

noteworthy that the Committee is considering for the first time a 

number of education bills that would provide the resources most 

needed for Native American language survival. These bills at the 

same time, candidly speaking, being looked at with a little bit of 

skepticism and I will tell you why. Because throughout the history 

of education in this country, native people have always had their 

own indigenous form of education. It’s an education rooted in language and culture. This indigenous form of education is what has 

enabled many of our tribes to survive in the face of historical 

events that Mr. Wilson alluded to just a few minutes ago. 

This history of American education in this country is replete with 

examples of where they would deliver attempts time and time 

again, especially with Federal education policy leading the way, to 

undermine these very foundations of indigenous education. 

So convening today’s hearing in the context of what education 

can do to assist in the maintenance and survival of native languages is, therefore, especially significant to us today. 

The second reason that this hearing is significant is because I believe that at no time in the history of this nation has the possibility 

existed as it does now for Congress to support a conscious movement among Native American people to define for themselves a vision of education for their children, reflecting what is of most concern to them. 

The inclusion of language as an integral part of daily education 

that children could and receive and the potential benefits that chilVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:58 Nov 06, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\FC\8-31-06\HED243.000 EDUWK PsN: DICK
25

dren derive from the experiences and provide such opportunities is 

a part of that education vision that native people have for their 

children. 

Native communities want the best for their children. They want 

their children to do well academically and they want to see them 

develop as competent learners. Not just in mainstream societies 

but as members of their own tribal communities. The need for preparing future leaders of these communities rests on the kind of 

educational programs we provide to support Indian students as 

they come to appreciate and understand the value and the application of their ancestral languages to their daily lives as well as the 

life of the communities from which they come. 

Unfortunately, this vision for education has never fully embraced 

or has never been fully realized in the history of this nation as Federal legislation has often tended to drive practice and policy away 

from the concerns of native people regarding the maintenance of 

language and culture. 

Within the last decades, as we have seen language shift happen 

in many of our communities, the concern for language survival is 

driven by many tribes who want to see their children learn these 

languages. In New Mexico, as an example, there are a number of 

tribal communities who have established community-based language efforts as Senator Udall alluded to earlier, places like 

Tesuque, Santa Clara, San Juan, San Alfonso, Acoma, Cochiti, 

Zuni. These are all examples of communities, they are not all of 

them, but who have stepped to the plate and established their own 

initiatives as community-based efforts first. 

Many of the circumstances though that we come up against has 

forced many of us to take these community-based efforts into that 

school settings and this is where we feel that the Committee can 

be especially helpful because we need that support. We need that 

support in terms of education bills that are going to make a way 

for children to learn these languages in schools. 

The significance of these developments is that they have also set 

in motion a whole new set of precedents concerning the treatment 

of native languages in schools. 

Consider that states like New Mexico, for example, now have in 

place statutory laws that not only support the establishment of 

heritage language programs as a new category of state-wide legal 

funding, but also acquiesced to tribes the development of their 

processes for certifying tribal members as language teachers in 

public schools. 

MOUs that have been developed between local school districts 

and tribes have also begun to open the doors for native communities to develop their own programs of native language instruction. It follows that as these kinds of developments emerge at the 

local and at the state level, that there should also be a similar 

movement within Federal education policy that fully supports the 

intent of the original native languages act by making available the 

funding necessary for such initiatives. As well the need for teacher 

training resources to successfully initiate and maintain these efforts is crucially needed. Tribal communities who do not have the 

infrastructure nor the resources to provide these services can be assisted by having the means to access technical service from trainVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:58 Nov 06, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\FC\8-31-06\HED243.000 EDUWK PsN: DICK
26

ing centers such as what you proposed back in 2003 when the Senate Indian affairs Committee held their hearing in Washington. 

I know I only have a few minutes, and I know that the full text 

of my testimony has been submitted to you all, but I would like to 

just——

Chairman MCKEON. The full text of each of your testimonies will 

be in the record. 

Ms. SIMS. I would like to summarize my comments today by saying that for all of us here in this room, not just the communities 

from New Mexico, but all across this nation, language is at the 

heart of our survival. It’s the heart of our sociocultural systems. It’s 

the heart of our own systems of jurisprudence in governments that 

we had from time immemorial. Language is the means by which 

we pass on to our children the things that are essential for their 

socialization into the lives of our communities. It’s the link by 

which we pass on values and beliefs. 

For many communities, such as our own Pueblo tribes here in 

New Mexico, these languages are the primary and sole means for 

transmitting traditional knowledge, religious beliefs and practices. 

These aspects of language use all combine to form the essence of 

what has been for us the foundation for educating native children. 

And we hope as members of this Committee that you will take back 

to Congress and your colleagues in the House and the Senate the 

notion and the ideas and what has been expressed to you today of 

how critical these languages are and how critical they have been 

to our survival for thousands of years. 

And in this room there are students, there are children that have 

every desire to learn these languages, and as part of the education 

for these children, there should be no question that language it a 

part of that and that language doesn’t have to be something set 

aside or that it’s something special or something additive; that language learning is just as important as learning other things in 

school. And we know from research that has been done, latitudinal 

research on one-way and two-way bilingual language programs, 

that benefits children derive from being in these classrooms where 

they are schooled in their heritage language, they go beyond just 

the fact of learning the language itself. They come with the added 

benefits that children derive from having lessons taught that reflect where they come from. 

In essence, the things that they receive as part of language 

learning with their own community people teaching them, that is 

the foundation of learning that oftentimes when children don’t 

have that, I’m afraid some of all these kinds of ills we see in terms 

of academics grow from that, from not having that opportunity. 

So I would remind you all, gentlemen and ladies of the Committee, that as you have this discussion with us today, please don’t 

forget that what’s at stake here is the children that are out there 

and the children that are probably in the classrooms now that 

couldn’t be here today. 

So I will end my comments here, and I also want to just mention 

very briefly that I do also have additional letters of support that 

I would like to hand to the Committee that come from different organizations as well as the University of New Mexico and if I could 

submit that to the Committee, I would appreciate it. 

27

[The prepared statement of Ms. Sims follows:]

Prepared Statement of Christine P. Sims, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Language, Literacy, and Sociocultural Studies, Institute for 

American Indian Education, College of Education, University of New 

Mexico 

Part I: Introduction 

Mr. Chairman and Members of this Committee: My name is Dr. Christine Sims. 

I am an Assistant Professor at the University of New Mexico in the College of Education. I am one of six Native faculty in the Department of Language, Literacy, and 

Sociocultural Studies who represent professionals in the field of American Indian 

Education. We are part of a growing institute, namely the Institute for American 

Indian Education, based in the UNM College of Education. The Institute is dedicated to the promotion of Indigenous leadership and research in the field of education and seeks to increase the capacity of American Indian tribes in developing, 

expanding, and improving the delivery of instructional services that address the 

educational and linguistic needs of American Indian students. I would like to acknowledge many of my colleagues from the University who are here today in support of the important matters that will be discussed today concerning the recovery 

and preservation of Native American languages. 

I am here today also speaking in the capacity of a tribal member from the Pueblo 

of Acoma, one of the 19 Pueblo Indian tribes of New Mexico. I have lived all my 

life in this Pueblo and have been involved in our community’s language retention 

program as a language teacher trainer and an advisor to the tribe for its various 

language initiatives. I would like to acknowledge their presence here as well today. 

As you can see, there are many other members of various tribal communities also 

present with us. While I cannot name them all individually in the time I have been 

allotted, I do want to recognize these individuals who represent Native communities 

in their various capacities as tribal leaders, elders, Native language teachers, parents, and students all of whom are especially concerned about the issue of native 

language survival. Some of these individuals have brought with them letters of support for the proposed amendments and they would like to submit these at some 

point to this body. 

On behalf of my fellow tribal people I would like to welcome you to New Mexico. 

We take great pride in knowing that here in New Mexico, our Native cultures and 

villages represent some of the oldest and longest sustained tribal communities in 

this nation. Many of our present-day Pueblo villages still exist in their original locations predating the entrance of Europeans to the Southwest. Your presence here 

today is therefore one that we have anticipated with great interest and concern 

about what is being proposed as amendments to the Native Languages Act. We hope 

that in your conversations with us today, that you will take back to Congress the 

essence of why these proposed bills are so important to all of us in Indian Country. 

I want to thank this Committee for the invitation to speak at this hearing and 

while I recognize that the time allotted to me for my comments is short, I hope that 

the full text of my written testimony will provide you with information that will be 

helpful and insightful as you deliberate the various amendments to the Native Languages Act. Specifically I am referring to the following three bills that have been 

proposed by various members of the U.S. House and Senate: 1) the American Language Preservation Act (H.R. 4766); 2) the Native American Language Amendment 

Act of 2006 (S.2674); and 3) the Native American Language Amendment Act of 2006 

(H.R. 5222). All of these bills which propose funding support for language immersion 

programs and assistance to language survival schools and language nests are 

amendments which we support. We are especially supportive of these same provisions included in Representative Heather Wilson’s bill (H.R. 4766) but which also 

includes training services for native language instructors, demonstration programs 

and research in language policy based at the University of New Mexico. 

Part II. Language and Culture, the Foundations for the Education of American Indian Children 

I would like to note, that this hearing comes at an especially significant time in 

the history of American Indian education for several reasons. First, while it is noteworthy that this Committee is considering for the first time a number of education 

bills that would provide the resources most needed for Native American language 

survival, these bills are at the same time, candidly speaking, being met with a bit 

of skepticism from among many in Indian Country. Why? Because throughout all 

the thousands of years that our tribal communities have existed, there has always 

been a system of indigenous education for our children that is essentially rooted in 

28

language and culture. This indigenous form of education is what has enabled many 

of our tribes to survive in the face of historical events and federal education policy 

that have attempted at various times to tear away at the very fabric of Native 

American life (Adams, 1995). The history of American Indian education in this country is replete with examples of how such deliberate attempts have occurred time and 

time again, often with federal education policy leading the way, in undermining the 

very foundation of what should have been for Native people, the rightful education 

of their children as members of unique and sovereign nations (Hinton, 2001). Convening today’s hearing in the context of what education can do to assist in the maintenance and survival of Native languages is therefore especially significant, considering this past history. 

The second reason this hearing is significant is because I believe that at no time 

in the history of this nation has the possibility existed as it does now, for Congress 

to support a conscious movement among Native American people to define for themselves a vision of education for their children, reflecting what is of most concern to 

them. The inclusion of language as an integral part of the daily education that Indian children could and should receive and the potential benefits that children derive from these experiences when provided such opportunities is a part of the vision 

that Native people have for their children (Blum Martinez, 2000; Sims, 2001). Native tribal communities want the best for their children. They want their children 

to do well academically and they want to see them develop as confident learners 

both in mainstream society as well as in their own tribal communities. The need 

for preparing future leaders of these communities, as well, rests in the kind of educational programs that support Indian students as they come to appreciate and understand the value and application of their ancestral languages to their daily lives 

as well as in the life of the communities from which they come. Unfortunately this 

vision for education has never been fully realized in the history of this nation as 

federal legislation has often tended to drive practice and policy away from the concerns of Native people regarding the maintenance of language and culture. 

Within the last several decades as the growing phenomenon of language shift towards English has evolved in many Native communities this concern for language 

survival has driven many tribes to consider establishing native language initiatives 

in schools. Here in New Mexico, there are a number of tribal communities who have 

established community-based language efforts that work in conjunction with local 

schools to provide language immersion classes for their students. The intent of these 

initiatives has been to provide children the opportunity to learn their tribal heritage 

languages alongside their regular academic studies. Other communities have established entire schools that teach all school subject matter in the native language. Regardless of how different tribal communities have chosen to address the need for 

language instruction the bottom line for these communities has been the need for 

re-strengthening and revitalizing Native languages as spoken living languages. 

The significance of these developments, therefore, is that they have set in motion 

a whole new set of precedents concerning the treatment of Native languages in 

schools. Consider that states like New Mexico, for example, have in place statutory 

laws that not only support the establishment of heritage language programs as a 

new category of state funded bilingual programs but have also acquiesced to tribes 

the development of their own processes for certifying tribal members as language 

instructors in the public schools. The development of local MOUs between local New 

Mexico school districts and tribes has begun to open the doors for Native communities in the development of their own programs for Native language instruction in 

public schools. Lastly, as educational institutions such as the University of New 

Mexico’s Institute for American Indian Education have responded to tribal leaders’ 

calls for the inclusion of Native language in the education of New Mexico’s Native 

children, new multi-agency collaborations have begun to emerge that support this 

vision. This includes the University of New Mexico’s College of Education working 

in conjunction with state level agencies such as the New Mexico Public Education 

Department and the New Mexico Department of Indian Affairs. In summary, it follows that as these examples of new collaboration at the local and state level emerge, 

there should also follow a similar movement within federal education policy that 

fully supports the intent of the original Native American Languages Act of 1990, 

by making available the funding necessary for such initiatives. As well, the need 

for Native language teacher training should also be considered an integral part of 

sustaining successful efforts in language maintenance. Tribal language communities 

who do not have the infrastructure nor the resources to provide these services to 

their own members can be assisted by having access to these services through a language teacher training center as originally proposed by this witness in hearings conducted on this same topic in 2003 to the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. 

29

The skepticism I alluded to earlier lies in the fact that tribal concerns about the 

education of Native children may not always be appreciated in light of current federal education policy that drives mainstream educational practice. This is especially 

apparent when tribal priorities in education are inclusive of native language instruction but where mainstream education policy does not follow or omits any direct 

support for such initiatives. Support for language nests, school based and community based language immersion programs therefore also need to be considered in 

light of tribal priorities and how current federal education policy will need to change 

in order to fully support these efforts. 

Part III. The Significance of Native Language Immersion Programs 

For indigenous people across this nation, the issue of language survival is inextricably linked to cultural survival. Language is at the heart of our sociocultural 

systems of kinship and identity. Language is at the heart of our systems of jurisprudence and governance as is still carried on in many tribal communities such as the 

Pueblos of New Mexico. It is the means by which our children are socialized into 

the life of the community and our unique tribal ways of life. It is the link by which 

values and beliefs are handed down between and through successive generations. 

For many tribal communities such as the Pueblo tribes of New Mexico oral based 

foundations in the respective native languages, are also the primary and sole means 

for transmitting traditional knowledge, native religious beliefs and practices. These 

aspects of language use all combine to form the essence of what has been the foundation for educating Native children to take their place in our respective communities. 

With the introduction of mainstream American forms of education in the lives of 

Native children at the turn of the 20th century, however, much of the elements of 

Native education began to rapidly erode (Adams, 1988). The legacy of federal education systems and policies carried out in the early decades of the 20th century were 

especially detrimental to Native tribes, often exacerbating the already painful experiences of forced removal from traditional lands in many cases. The continuing legacy of such circumstances continue to haunt us today, when we view the problems 

and issues that are often associated with the low academic performance of Native 

children, including high drop out rates, high rates of youth suicides, and low academic test scores. There is much that will be said here today concerning the efficacy 

of educational initiatives that provide funding support for Native language initiatives. My remarks about the benefits to native students when they are provided the 

opportunity to learn their heritage language in an immersion setting are provided 

in the following section. 

Part IV. The Benefits of Language Immersion Programs 

Much of what we know as successful models of native language instruction are 

based on models of language immersion approaches first introduced by the Maori 

and Hawaiian language initiatives. These models have been successful in revitalizing these languages especially among school age and pre-school populations where 

students have had the opportunity to hear the spoken language used in the normal 

everyday contexts of the classroom by their teachers and their peers. These models 

have also been the basis for several community-based initiatives here in New Mexico. 

The Pueblo of Cochiti, for example, is a Keres speaking community in which a 

day care center was established in 2002 for toddlers and infants. It is a small day 

care center that provides a place for working parents to leave their children with 

fluent Keres speaking caregivers. In this way, young children who are at the critical 

stages of language development receive the full benefit of hearing the native Keres 

language spoken to them as they eat, play, nap, and engage in the normal everyday 

contexts of spending time in the care of Keres speakers. Once these children enter 

Head Start, it is very apparent when they participate in the community’s summer 

immersion camps that they are a step ahead of their peers who have not had exposure to the Keres language. Their comprehension and receptive abilities in the native language are readily apparent in their response to questions and directions 

given by adult language speakers. 

As these children matriculate to succeeding grades, they are given the opportunity 

to continue learning their language through daily immersion classes at the local elementary public school. For those groups of Cochiti children who have had successive 

years of participation in language immersion summer programs over the last 6 to 

8 years as well as daily immersion classes at school the gains that they have made 

in learning the native language have been especially promising. These children are 

now at the stage where they are able to speak in the language and are able to use 

it as a means for communicating with peers, family members and their teachers. 

30

Furthermore, they exhibit a confidence in learning that extends beyond the immersion classes and into other areas of their schooling where many of them excel in 

various academic subjects. 

A similar model for an immersion class for Acoma Pueblo high school students 

was also recently begun in 2001. This initiative was developed as an extension of 

community-based efforts in the local Acoma community to provide language instruction in an immersion setting. Students receive high school credit for taking this elective which is provided through daily classes. Some of these students have also had 

the benefit of attending the Pueblo’s summer immersion programs over the past six 

years. Many of them have also begun to use the native Keres language on their 

own. Some students have often noted how this learning opportunity has afforded 

them the confidence and the language skills that are necessary for participation in 

the community’s traditional practices. This year was also the first time one of the 

Keres language students was able to deliver her high school valedictorian address 

in both English and in Keres. A recent external evaluation of the high school program found that many students were especially aware of this critical tie between 

language learning and its application to the traditional life of the community. 

Thus, initiatives such as these reflect the nature of what I stated earlier as being 

the core and foundation for educating Indian students. In these contexts the students begin to acquire the ability to use the skills learned in the native language 

and apply them in their daily lives. The ways in which these students interact with 

their teachers who are from the community speaks to the high level of respect this 

students gain from the using the language in its rightful contexts as a language of 

respect. It is also reflected in other aspects of their academic work leading to successful completion of a high school education. 

While these examples are but a sample of what children can gain from being instructed in the native language, the emerging results we see as language and culture are infused in the regular instructional program for American Indian students 

points to the important role that native language instruction can play in the daily 

lives of pre-school and school age children in our tribal communities. We therefore 

want this Committee to know that we fully support HR4766 proposed by NM Representative Heather Wilson and we wish to underscore the importance of providing 

appropriate levels of funding for language immersion programs whether they be in 

schools or in communities. We see as well the need for demonstration programs 

housed within an entity such as the Institute for American Indian Education here 

at UNM so that technical assistance in teacher training and program development 

can be provided to American Indian communities in the Southwest and across this 

country. 

REFERENCES

Adams, David A., (1988). ‘‘Fundamental Considerations: The deep meaning of Native American schooling, 1880-1900.’’ Harvard Educational Review. Vol. 58. 

No.1. Pp. 1-28. 

Blum Martinez, R. (2000). Languages and tribal sovereignty: whose language is it 

anyway? In Theory Into Practice 39, No. 4, 211-219. 

Hinton, L. (2001). Federal language policy and indigenous languages in the United 

States. In K. Hale & L. Hinton, (Eds), The Green Book of Language Revitalization in Practice. San Diego: Academic Press, 39-48. 

Sims, C. (2001). Native language planning: a pilot process in the Acoma Pueblo community. In K. Hale & L. Hinton, (Eds), The Green Book of Language Revitalization in Practice. San Diego: Academic Press, 63-73. 

Chairman MCKEON. We would be happy to accept those. Without 

objection, they will be included in the record. 

Ms. SIMS. Thank you. 

Chairman MCKEON. Dr. Cornelius. 

STATEMENT OF CAROL CORNELIUS, AREA MANAGER, ONEIDA 

CULTURAL HERITAGE DEPARTMENT, ONEIDA TRIBE OF INDIANS 

Ms. CORNELIUS. [Introduction spoken in Native American Language.] 

I couldn’t do that 10 years ago. I’m learning right with the kids. 

I said, ‘‘Greetings to all of the people here.’’ In our language, my 

31

name is Ga neka o lu, which means ‘‘a little bit of water, water is 

precious.’’ I am of the Turtle Clan of the Oneida Nation, which is 

a member of the Haudenosaunee. You would have heard of us as 

the Iroquois confederacy. I am also Muhhecanneuw, which is the 

people by the Hudson River who were removed to Wisconsin also. 

The last speaker of that language died in the 1950’s, so I know absolutely what it’s like for part of my heritage—there are no elders 

to go to. And I am also a little bit of mom-taught. 

I wish—first I wish to extend a thank you to the Committee for 

having us here and having this opportunity to testify on this Act. 

The Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin is located near Green 

Bay, Wisconsin. Green Bay Packers. They need a little help right 

now. 

Chairman MCKEON. A lot of help. 

Ms. CORNELIUS. I stand by them. Our tribal membership is 

15,591 with about 6120 living on or near the reservation, our 

65,000 acre reservation. Our homelands is what is known today as 

New York State. Our homelands are down to 32 acres of land 

there. And we were removed to Wisconsin in the 1820’s. 

History demonstrates we lost most of our speakers due to Federal policies prohibiting tribal boarding schools and public schools 

from allowing our languages to be spoken by the children attending 

those schools. Every Oneida family, including my own, has a story 

about why we don’t speak the language. When I was a child I 

asked my grandmother to teach me and she said, ‘‘The only way 

you make it in the white man’s world is to speak English,’’ and she 

refused to teach me. It’s taken us a long time to understand that 

she was doing that to protect us from all of the hurt that she had 

been through, and to be forgiving in that way. It took a lot of time 

to know that. 

There are heart-rendering stories of how our ancestors were 

abused in boarding schools both physically and psychologically for 

speaking our language. The Oneida Language Revitalization Program has determined that we have only five tribal members who 

learned Oneida as their first language who are alive yet today. Two 

of those are over 95 years old and they have helped us in the past 

but they are no longer able to teach us. The other three remaining 

elders, and the youngest of those is 86, comes to work with us anywhere from two to 7 hours a week when their health permits. 

The Oneida Language Revitalization Program has also determined it will take at least 100 people to speak Oneida to keep the 

language alive among our nearly 16,000 members. Unfortunately, 

to date there’s only one person who has become a fluent speaker 

of Oneida as his second language, and he did that with his grandmother, learning right from her. And now he is currently teaching 

our trainees. There are more details of our program and our tribal 

government support for our language in our written comments. 

We have people who are still at the beginners stage, meaning 

they just know some basic vocabulary and they are teaching already, what they do know, at the daycare, the Head Start in our 

school system. We don’t have any teachers for the students in the 

public schools and they are asking us for language and culture 

teachers. We could impact 2036 children daily if we had enough 

language teachers. 

32

While we continue to explore every possible way to keep our language alive, we have not yet found the key to producing fluent 

speakers. However, unlike previous generations, including mine, 

our youngest children attending Oneida child care, the Head Start, 

Oneida Nation School System, are exposed to the language everyday as part of their daily life. 

Additionally, from 2000 to 2003 the tribe received a grant from 

the ANA grant. This provided two more trainees in multi-media capabilities. Our role is to produce fluent speakers who teach our language to the rest of the tribal members so once again you hear our 

language spoken on a daily basis. 

In summary of the bill, I took the chance to look at it, and I 

know it’s crucial for the survival of native languages. As our language was taken away by forbidding our children to speak, the revitalization of our languages needs to begin with teaching our children again to speak our languages. I applaud the authors of this 

legislation for recognizing that we must begin with the children 

and the families. I notice the strong component in there for families’ involvement, and that’s just absolutely critical to a survival. 

There are several concerns I have with the legislation. Not 

major, but some. In Section 108 B No. 4, ‘‘Provide a preference in 

enrollment for students and families who are fluent in native languages.’’ Since we do not fit this categories and many nations will 

not, this could be restated, if you are willing to do this, to say 

‘‘preference for those families who are committed to speaking the 

native language,’’ so that way you are involving the whole family. 

You know that the parents will support this when the children go 

home, and the parents will be learning also. 

In Section 108 B 6, ‘‘ensure that a Native American language becomes a dominant medium of instruction in the Native American 

Language nest not later than 6 years after the date on which the 

Native American language nest first received funding under this 

title.’’ Should not the requirement be that Native American language is the dominant language from the beginning of the establishment of the language nest. 

We have done some step-by-step immersion types of program, 

and we find that people will go flip back into English as soon as 

they are out of class so we need to do everything, everything from 

the minute you walk in the door, stay in the language. 

Section 110, Demonstration Program B 3, said ‘‘demonstration 

programs is located in the state in which at least seven Native 

American languages are spoken.’’ Could this be a regional consortium several states, if necessary. I don’t know that all states have 

seven different native languages in them, so that would be more 

inclusive. 

Without the enactment of this legislation, the prospects for native languages are dim, as we heard from other panelists. The 

grants awarded by ANA are so highly competitive, because they 

don’t have that much funding, that we have not been able to receive another grant since 2003. 

Additionally, the United Nations Education and Scientific and 

Cultural Organization has adopted a series of standards that will 

critically endanger the viability for future generations. This legislation rights the hope with the right resources we should keep our 

33

native languages alive and spoken. Our language, Oneida language, is critically in danger, according to New Mexico standards, 

and we are working as hard as we can, but we really need the help. 

I had a chance at the beginning of August to go to Cherokee, 

North Carolina and see the language nest. The children were—

there were 2-year-olds in the room I went in and they had been in 

since they were 7 weeks old and everything said to them those children did exactly what they were told. They responded that way. 

They were even teaching 2-year-olds with flash cards of the Sequoia Sillabary. There was one boy who knew what it meant. It 

was beautiful. In the other room were about 1-year-olds to a yearand-a-half and everything they did that they told them in the language, they responded. That just made my heart soar, and passing 

this legislation will also do that for all of us. 

[Conclusion spoken in Native American Language.] 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Cornelius follows:]

Prepared Statement of Dr. Carol Cornelius, Oneida Tribe of Indians of 

Wisconsin 

She.ku kawantyokwa. 

I wish to extend a thank you to the Committee for this opportunity to testify on 

Native language. 

I would also like to acknowledge two members of our government, the Oneida 

Tribe of Wisconsin, who could join us today: Melinda Danforth and Paul Ninham 

The Oneida Tribe of Wisconsin is located near Green Bay, WI. Our tribal membership is 15,591 with 6,120 living on or near our 65,000 acre reservation. Our homelands are in what is known today as New York State, and we were removed to Wisconsin in the 1820’s. 

We lost most of our speakers due to historical events such as the boarding school 

and public schools. Every Oneida family has a story that explains why they don’t 

speak Oneida. My grandmother said, ‘‘the only way you’ll make in the White man’s 

world is to speak English.’’ And, she refused to teach me. There are heart-rending 

stories of how our ancestors were abused, both physically and psychologically, in the 

boarding school for speaking our language. 

We have only five fluent speakers left who learned Oneida as their first language. 

Two of those are over 95 years old and unable to assist us anymore. Three of those 

Elders who are over 86 years old, work with our 8 language trainees for 2-7 hours 

per week. 

We currently have eight language trainees in our Language Revitalization program for our enrollment of 15,591 people. We need at least a hundred people speaking Oneida to keep the language alive. There is only one person who has been able 

to learn and become proficient in Oneida as a second language, and he learned from 

his grandmother. He is currently teaching our trainees. 

The Oneida Language Revitalization Program began in the spring of 1996 when 

a survey found that only 25-30 Elders were left who learned to speak Oneida as 

their first language. A ten year plan was developed to connect Elders with Oneida 

Language/Culture Trainees in a semi-immersion process which would produce 

speakers and teachers of the Oneida language. We began with ten Elders and five 

trainees. Today we have 3 Elders left and 8 trainees. Our trainees are in language 

class from 8:30 am to noon, and from 1pm to 3 pm daily, and then they have 1 1/

2 hours study time. They have just completed a two year program in basic vocabulary. These next two years they are moving into what we call conversational 

functionality, meaning they can understand when spoken to and respond to situational conversation in the language. The next phase will be the advanced, when the 

trainees can stay in the language and respond in a flowing manner, and they will 

be teaching the Nation. The Trainees utilize Oneida stories from the Works 

Progress Administration (WPA) from the 1930-1940’s, and the Bilingual program 

(1970’s) and are currently documenting the language by recording the Elders. 

We have six people who are still at the beginner speaker stage who are already 

teaching basic vocabulary for our Child Care (100 children), Head Start (108), and 

our school system (350 elementary, and 125 high school students.) These teachers 

have not been able to attend classes to advance their speaking ability due to their 

teaching load. We don’t have any teachers for the students in the public schools 

34

(1,353 students) and these young people have asked for language teachers for their 

schools. We just don’t have the language speakers/teachers to meet the needs. 

We have tried, and are trying, every possible way to keep our language alive, but 

we have not yet found the key to producing fluent speakers, yet. What has changed 

in the current generation is that they are exposed to our language on a limited basis 

as part of their daily life if they go to Child Care, Head Start, and our Oneida Nation School system. The last two or three generations did not have that opportunity. 

Our goal is to produce fluent speakers who can teach our language to the rest of 

our tribal members so that we hear the language spoken on a daily basis. 

We have the support of our government as evidenced in four resolutions since 

1994 which declare Oneida as the official language of our Nation, and support all 

efforts to regain our spoken language. We have an Oneida language Charter Team 

which works on short, intermediate, and long range planning. Language nests and 

survival schools have always been part of our goals. 

Our long range plans include: 1) Official recognition of our elders as National 

Treasures—completed in 2003, 2 ) Developing and implementing Oneida Nation 

Language Teacher Certification based on competencies in speaking, teaching, curriculum, linguistics, and teaching materials development, 3) Developing a career 

path for our youth to become fluent speakers and teachers, 4) Planning for summer 

immersion family language experience, 5) a radio station in the language, and 6) 

hearing Oneida language spoken throughout our Nation. As Oneida people, it is our 

responsibility to carry the Oneida language to the present and future generations. 

The Oneida Language Revitalization Program has a WEB site that has the history of the program, a page dedicated to the staff, and on-line language lessons. 

This legislation HR 4766 is crucial for the survival of Native languages which are 

critically endangered by UNESCO standards. Just as our language was taken away 

by forbidding our children to speak, so should the revitalization of our languages 

begin with our children being in language nests. I applaud the authors of this legislation for recognizing that we must begin with the children and their families. 

There are several areas of concern in the legislation. 

Sec 108, b # 4 ‘‘Provide a preference in enrollment for students and families who 

are fluent in a Native American language.’’ Since we do not fit this category, and 

many Nations will not, this could be restated to: Preference for those families who 

are committed to speaking their Native language. 

Section 108, b, 6 ‘‘ensure that a Native American language becomes the dominant 

medium of instruction in the Native American language nest not later than 6 years 

after the date on which the Native American language nest first received funding 

under this title.’’ Should not the requirement be that the Native American language 

is the dominant language from the beginning of the establishment of the language 

nest? 

Sec. 110 Demonstration Program b, 3 ‘‘is located in a State in which at least 7 

Native American languages are spoken’’ Could this be a regional consortium of several States if necessary? 

We had an ANA grant from 2000-2003 which provided two more trainees and 

multi-media capabilities. However, because ANA has limited resources its grants 

are so highly competitive we have not been able to receive approval of a grant since 

2003. This legislation provides the hope that with the right resources we could keep 

our Native languages alive. 

Yawˆ ko, Dane.ho. 

Chairman MCKEON. Thank you. Mr. Montoya. 

STATEMENT OF SAM MONTOYA, LANGUAGE & CULTURAL 

RESOURCES, ADMINISTRATOR, PUEBLO OF SANDIA 

Mr. MONTOYA. [Introduction spoken in Native American language.] 

In my language that means, ‘‘How are you this afternoon’’? My 

name is Sam Montoya. I am from Sandia Pueblo where I serve as 

the Tribe’s Language and Cultural Resource Administrator. I work 

with other tribal members to support policies and procedures that 

will encourage the preservation of our language and culture at 

Sandia. 

Chairman McKeon, Vice Chairman Petri, Representative Wilson 

and Representative Udall, I thank you for the opportunity to disVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:58 Nov 06, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\FC\8-31-06\HED243.000 EDUWK PsN: DICK
35

cuss native language programs in New Mexico. I hope this meeting 

will be productive step encouraging native language use in our 

communities. Thank you for introducing the proposed legislation. 

Today I’m going to discuss briefly the state of languages at 

Sandia Pueblo, what we have done so far and suggestions for ways 

in which lawmakers here and in Washington can support our efforts and the efforts of our tribal groups. I grew up speaking Southern Tiwa at home with my parents and grandparents. Many other 

people of my generation went to Indian school in Albuquerque or 

Santa Fe but I attended school in Bernalillo. A lot of Indianschooled people were punished for speaking native languages and 

told that English was the language of school and work. These people returned home and wanted to make things easier for their children, started speaking English more in the home. As a result, I am 

one of the youngest speakers of Sandia Tiwa. I am 60 years old. 

Even though children in the Pueblo attend schools in Bernalillo 

and Albuquerque now, the missing generational link in terms of 

language transmission at home has meant that fewer and fewer 

people are able to speak our language. Community members speak 

English at work, return home, watch programs in English and listen to music in English words. Our language is one of the important connections we have to history, our culture, our land, and our 

future as Pueblo people. 

During the last 20 years people in the community realize that 

the language was indeed passed down and have taken steps to promote language learning. Since starting to work on language preservation for the tribe, I have been working with other education staff 

to expand these efforts. Our approach has been to try to create as 

many different kinds of learning tools as possible while ensuring 

that the Sandia Tiwa language remains in the community. 

So far we have developed an alphabet enabling us to write the 

language, finished the first draft of the Tiwa/English Dictionary, 

completed a 15-lesson dialog-based adult curriculum, developed 

materials for use in the Head Start classrooms and started a Master-Apprentice Program. In addition, we have just received word 

that money has been made available for tribal members from 

Sandia to teach the language to committee members attending 

Bernalillo County public schools. 

We are especially excited about the Master-Apprentice program 

at Sandia. Because we have few speakers, it is difficult to create 

situations where total immersion can take place, situations where 

a large group of people are speaking nothing but Tiwa in order to 

teach the language in the way it was traditionally passed down—

orally. The Master-Apprentice program pairs the speaker or a master with a language learner or apprentice for sessions where instruction in the language can take place anywhere—at home, walking around in the Pueblo, at the store. While these individual immersion sessions can take place outside of the classroom environment, which is the ideal learning situation, we still support making 

other written tools for learners to use. After the learner has worked 

with the teacher, written materials can help supplement language 

skills or can be used during times that the teacher is not available. 

It is our belief that because there are so many different types of 

learners, it is up to us to provide as many different materials as 

36

possible, some written, some oral, to support learners and encourage them to speak Tiwa whenever they can. 

Although writing is controversial in Pueblo communities, and 

many others, we are committed to implementing the change while 

preserving our right to control the written materials created for 

language instruction. 

The benefits of encouraging indigenous language use in our community are numerous. For instance, many of the children at Sandia 

have recently been learning to use traditional greetings for adults, 

Nana and Tata. These titles indicate respect in the presence of 

family structure that extends beyond the nuclear model with all 

adults responsible for guiding children in the Pueblo and all children recognizing older people as respected elders. Similarly, people 

are using the Tiwa names for native plants used for medicinal purposes. As you can see from these examples, not everything about 

our culture that our language captures can be simply translated 

into English. 

Another benefit in our community we have seen as a result of expanding our language program is language use is now something 

that people discuss, even individuals who are not currently active 

as teachers or learners. For example, people often avoided talking 

about the history of forced assimilation in boarding schools I mentioned earlier because of feelings of shame and regret associated 

with the experience there and the resulting language loss. After 

educating ourselves about language loss and revitalization and realizing we are one of the communities facing such issues, community members at Sandia are more likely to participate in language 

programs and talk about what should be done. 

Finally, we believe that growing up in a bilingual community is 

a asset, not a liability. As psychologists and linguists have found, 

children who are able to communicate in two or more languages 

have an easier time learning additional languages and new skills. 

We would like to offer all the advantages of language learning, 

both specifically and generally, to our children. 

In order to continue the expansion of the Sandia Tiwa language 

program and realize these benefits, I welcome the chance to make 

several suggestions regarding what can be done at the national 

level to support our community-based efforts of other tribal groups. 

For the last 4 years, we have been working with a linguist who 

helped us to develop our alphabet and other materials. She was 

fortunate enough to be the recipient of the National Science Foundation/National Endowment for the Humanities Documenting Endangered Languages Fellowship last year, which allowed her to devote her time to working with myself and other education staff on 

the language program and to train tribal members on using the alphabet and developing Tiwa materials. We strongly recommend increasing funding for this program and others like it so those that 

can offer technical support to tribes can apply for funding as well 

as tribal members could be compensated for the time spent participating in activities such as the Master-Apprentice program, or 

working on new language materials for the community. 

I would like to stress all the materials documented as part of this 

grant are being archived at the Pueblo library. The absolute necessity of recognizing the native people should decide who has access 

37

to language materials, and how to approach language revitalization 

in the individual communities must be part of the new program 

funding as well. 

As I mentioned before, we have recently received word that there 

is an opportunity for Sandia Pueblo to choose a community member 

to teach Tiwa language in the Bernalillo County Schools. This is 

an important step for the State of New Mexico. We would also like 

to see, as part of this program, more instructional support to help 

such programs get off the ground. As many of you in this room who 

are from communities who have already participated in the program know, people who are fluent speakers do not always have 

classroom experience and have to develop all their own teaching 

materials. Providing training on curricular design, second language 

learning and teaching should be a part of this program which 

would allow new teachers to be supported during the first year of 

instruction. 

Again, increasing funding opportunities for tribes participating in 

the process would be helpful. In terms of more intangible ways that 

we feel our elected representatives can support community efforts 

to promote indigenous language use, we urge you to withhold support for so-called ‘‘English Only’’ legislation which aims to establish 

English as the official language of the United States, and support 

bilingual education in general. 

Although Native peoples are part of the individual sovereign nations, we also have a stake in the national language debate as decisions made about policies affect the schools we attend and our participation in the state and national programs. 

Trying to establish English as the only official language in this 

country erases our hard-earned claims to sovereignty and sends a 

message to our children that our languages are not as valued or 

as important as English. This runs counter to all of our efforts as 

indigenous people to reverse language loss and take control of the 

language policy in our communities. 

Thank you all so much for inviting me to talk a little bit about 

language at Sandia Pueblo, and I look forward to working with all 

of you to in New Mexico. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Montoya follows:]

Prepared Statement of Sam Montoya, Language and Cultural Resource 

Administrator, Pueblo of Sandia 

Hinu mam kima? In our language this means How is your afternoon going? My 

name is Sam Montoya. I am from Sandia Pueblo, where I serve as the Tribe’s Language and Cultural Resource Administrator. I work with other tribal members to 

support policies and procedures that will encourage the preservation of our language 

and culture at Sandia. 

Chairman, McKeon, Vice Chairman Petri, Representative Wilson, and Representative Udall, I want to thank you for the opportunity to discuss Native language programs in New Mexico. I hope that this meeting will be a productive step in encouraging Native language use in our communities. 

Today I am going to discuss briefly the state of language use at Sandia Pueblo, 

what we have done so far, and suggestions for ways in which lawmakers here and 

in Washington can support our efforts and the efforts of other tribal groups. I grew 

up speaking Southern Tiwa at home with my parents and grandparents. Many 

other people of my generation went to Indian School in Albuquerque or Santa Fe, 

but I attended school in Bernalillo. While at Indian School, people were punished 

for speaking their Native languages, and were told that English was the language 

of school and work. These people returned home and, wanting to make things easier 

38

on their kids, started speaking English more in the home. As a result, I am one 

of the youngest speakers of the Sandia Tiwa language. 

Even though children from the Pueblo attend school in Bernalillo or Albuquerque 

now, this missing generational link in terms of language transmission at home has 

meant that fewer and fewer people are able to speak our language. Community 

members speak English at work and return home and watch programs in English 

and listen to music with English words. Our language is one of the most important 

connections we have to our history, our culture, our lands, and to our future as 

Pueblo people. 

During the last twenty years, people in the community realized that the language 

wasn’t being passed down, and have taken steps to promote language learning. 

Since starting to work on language preservation for the tribe, I have been working 

with other Education staff to expand these efforts. Our approach has been to try 

to create as many different kinds of language learning tools as possible while ensuring that the knowledge of the Sandia Tiwa language remains in the community. So 

far we have developed an alphabet enabling us to write our language, finished the 

first draft of a Tiwa/English Dictionary, completed a fifteen lesson dialogue-based 

adult curriculum, developed materials for use in our Head Start classrooms and 

started a Master-Apprentice Program. In addition we have just received word that 

money has been made available for a tribal member from Sandia to teach the language to community members attending Bernalillo Public Schools. 

We are especially excited about the new Master-Apprentice program at Sandia. 

Because we have so few speakers, it is difficult to create situations where total immersion can take place—situations where a large group of people are speaking nothing but Tiwa in order to teach the language the way it was traditionally passed 

down—orally. The Master-Apprentice Program pairs one speaker or ‘‘Master’’ with 

one language learner or ‘‘Apprentice’’ for sessions where instruction in the language 

can take place anywhere—at home, walking around the Pueblo, at the store. While 

these individual immersion sessions can take place outside of the classroom environment, which is the ideal learning situation, we still support making other, written 

tools for learners to use. After a learner has worked with their teacher, written materials can help to supplement language skills, or can be used during times that a 

teacher is not available. It is our belief that because there are so many different 

types of learners, it is up to us to provide as many materials as possible—some written, some oral—to support learners and encourage them to speak Tiwa whenever 

they can. Although writing is controversial in Pueblo communities, and many others, we are committed to implementing this new change while preserving our right 

to control the written materials created for language instruction. 

The benefits of encouraging indigenous language use in our community and others 

are numerous. For instance, many of the children at Sandia have recently been 

learning to use the traditional greetings for adults: Nana and Tata. These titles indicate respect and the presence of a family structure that extends beyond the nuclear model, with all adults responsible for guiding children at the Pueblo and all 

children recognizing older people as respected elders. Similarly, people are learning 

the Tiwa names for native plants that can be used for medicinal purposes. As you 

can see from these examples, not everything about our culture that our language 

captures can be simply translated into English. Another benefit to our community 

that we have seen as a result of expanding our language program is that language 

use is now something people discuss, even individuals who are not currently acting 

as teachers or learners. For example, people often avoided talking about the history 

of forced assimilation in boarding schools I mentioned earlier because of feelings of 

shame and regret associated with experiences there and the resulting language loss. 

After educating ourselves about language loss and revitalization and realizing that 

we are one of many communities facing such issues, community members at Sandia 

are much more likely to participate in language programs and talk about what 

should be done. Finally, we believe that growing up in a bilingual community is an 

asset, not a liability. As psychologists and linguists have found, children who are 

able to communicate in two or more languages have an easier time learning additional languages and accomplishing new tasks. We would like to offer all the advantages of language learning, both specific and general, to our children. 

In order to continue the expansion of the Sandia Tiwa language program and realize these benefits, I welcome this chance to make several suggestions regarding 

what can be done at the national level to support our community based efforts and 

the efforts of other tribal groups. For the last four years we have been working with 

a linguist who has helped in the development of our alphabet and other materials. 

She was fortunate enough to be a recipient of the National Science Foundation/National Endowment of the Humanities Documenting Endangered Languages Fellowship last year, which allowed her to devote her time to working with myself and 

39

other Education staff on the language program and to train tribal members on using 

the alphabet and developing Tiwa materials. We strongly recommend increasing 

funding for this program, and others like it, so that those that can offer technical 

support for tribes can apply for funding as well as tribal members who could be 

compensated for their time spent participating in activities such as the Master-Apprentice Program, or working on new language materials for the community. I 

would like to stress all materials produced as part of this NSF/NEH grant are being 

archived at the Pueblo library. The absolute necessity of recognizing that Native 

people should decide who has access to language materials and how to approach language revitalization in their individual communities must be part of any funding 

program as well. 

As I mentioned before, we have recently received word that there is an opportunity for Sandia Pueblo to choose a community member to teach the Tiwa language 

in the Bernalillo Schools. This is an important step forward for the State of New 

Mexico. We would also like to see, as part of this program, more institutional support to help such programs get off the ground. As many of you in this room who 

are from communities who have already participated in this program know, people 

who are fluent speakers do not always have classroom experience, and have to develop all of their own teaching materials. Providing training on curricula design, 

second language learning and teaching should be part of this program, which would 

allow new teachers to be supported during the first years of instruction. Again, increasing funding opportunities for tribes participating in this process would be helpful. 

In terms of more intangible ways that we feel our elected representatives can support community efforts to promote indigenous language use, we urge you to withhold support of so-called ‘‘English Only’’ legislation, which aims to establish English 

as the official language of the United States, and support bilingual education in general. Although Native peoples are part of individual sovereign nations, we also have 

a stake in the national language debate as decisions made about policy affect the 

school we attend and our participation in State and National programs. Trying to 

establish English as the only official language of this country erases our hardearned claims to sovereignty and sends a message to our children that our languages are not as valued or important as English. This runs counter to all of our 

efforts as indigenous people to reverse language loss and take control of language 

policy in our communities. 

Thank you all so much for inviting me to talk a little bit about language at 

Sandia Pueblo, and I look forward to working with you all to increase Native language use here in New Mexico. 

Haweu. 

Chairman MCKEON. I thank each and every one of you who attended this hearing today. 

STATEMENT OF KIMBERLY J. TABAHA, SENIOR, WINDOW 

ROCK HIGH SCHOOL 

Ms. TABAHA. Ya’ateeh to each and every one of you who are attending this hearing today. 

[Portion spoken in Native American language.] What that means 

in my language is, ‘‘My clan are Red Running Into the Water People clan.’’ My maternal grandfather is Red Bottom People clan and 

my paternal grandfather is Water Edge People clan. I am 17 years 

old and currently a senior at Window Rock High School. My parents are George and Imogene Tabaha. I am second oldest of my siblings. I have one older brother who recently graduated and three 

younger brothers. All together, I have a family of seven. We reside 

in Coalmine, New Mexico. We moved closer to my mother’s relatives because, as my culture usually says, the husband would 

have to move or the wife goes. 

First of all, I would like to thank the committee and, of course, 

Darrel Begay for the opportunity of a lifetime for me to share with 

you my way of expressing my culture. Good afternoon to the honVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:58 Nov 06, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\FC\8-31-06\HED243.000 EDUWK PsN: DICK
40

ored guests, dignitaries and the audience who are present here on 

this fine afternoon. 

I am here sitting in front of you all today to share how my Dine 

culture helped me through my life. I started out in a Navajo immersion program since my kindergarten days. I have been a part 

of many cultural events and I still continue today. 

My Navajo tradition is important aspect of my life, my family, 

my friends and my fellows in the Nation. I joined a princess pageant during my Middle School year that required native talent and 

speeches written in Navajo. I was devastated to know that not even 

half of the contestants could speak their own Native tongue but 

they all were excellent and that is why I am here today to strongly 

support the Navajo immersion classes to continue that will benefit 

all the younger generations from here as long as we have your full 

support. 

My language helped me obtain a title that I well deserved and 

am proud of. I was the Miss Tse Ho Tse Middle School princess and 

I represented my school well. To be honest, I was proud to know 

my knowledge of my language and traditions which gave me a 

strong self-esteem to succeed in school. To me and most of my 

peers, also some of the adults, say our language itself has many 

meanings symbolizing our way of life. My teachers, Ms. Lydia 

Fasthorse Begay and Lucy Antone and my parents agree with what 

I am representing to you all. Their support is what I have right 

now, including many other supporters. The grievance our grandparents go and still go through is knowing they couldn’t really rely 

on their grandkids who don’t know nothing of their native tongue. 

Yes, we do have Navajo classes located in our schools but what 

of the other schools that don’t? Not all Dine are learning their language and it hurts me and our parents, mainly our grandparents. 

Some say our language is on the verge of extinction and my generation has a chance to save our language. How can we if there’s 

only two or three schools located in the country who have Navajo 

classes as one of their subjects? We need more Navajo language 

programs provided to us teen-agers and young children around. 

I once saw a movie that said, ‘‘With great power comes great responsibility’’ and I strongly agree. Our weapon to society is our language and that gives us strength to go on and pursue our dreams. 

From experience I know my Navajo tradition has made me see beyond what I thought and wondered about my whole life. For example, I plan to attend college and major in computer science. Being 

a part of something that means on lot to more than one person is 

something I have foreseen a lot in my younger days but many students don’t really have the same vision as some of us because they 

don’t have the encouragement very few of us young adults have. 

But the future now holds the truth of how our language and tradition can change the course of the future. I will maintain and balance my tradition, including my language, along with the Western 

way of life, and I leave that up to you all. If you do consider more 

schools with Navajo immersion classes, I’m sure we will have the 

chance to save our Dine language. Thank you all for your time and 

your strong support to keep our Navajo immersion class going. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Tabaha follows:]

41

Prepared Statement of Kimberly J. Tabaha, Student of Window Rock High 

School 

Ya’ateeh, each & every one of you who are attending this Hearing today. First 

of all I would like to thank Congressman Mr. Rick Renzi, Mr. Daryl Begay for this 

opportunity of a life time to share with you my way of expressing my Dine Culture. 

And Good Morning to the honored guess, distinguish guess, dignitary guess and the 

audiences who are present here this fine morning. 

(Introduction in Navajo but revised in English) 

Hello my name is Kimberly Tabaha. My clans are Red Running into the water 

people clan, born for the Towering House clan, My Maternal Grandfather is Red bottom people clan, My Paternal Grandfather is Water Edge People Clan. I’m 17 years 

old and currently a senior at Window Rock High School. My parents are George and 

Imogene Tabaha. I am the second oldest of my siblings. I have one older brother 

who recently graduated and three younger brothers. All together I have a family of 

seven. We reside in Coalmine, New Mexico, we move closer to my mother relative 

because as the culture usually says the Husband would have to move where his wife 

goes. 

I’m standing here in front of all of you today to share how my Dine Culture 

helped me through my life. I started out in Navajo Immersion Program since my 

kindergarten days. I’ve learned many of my Navajo Traditional value since then. I 

have been apart of many cultural events and I still continue today. My Navajo Tradition is an important aspect of my life, family, friends, and my fellow Dine Nation. 

I’ve joined the Princess Pageant during my Middle School year that required native talent and speeches written in Navajo. I was devastated to know that not even 

half of the contestant couldn’t speak there own native tongue but they all were excellent. And that is why I am here to strongly support the Navajo immersion classes 

to continue that will benefit all the younger generation from here as long as we gat 

your full support. My language helped me obtain a title that I well deserved and 

most proud of. I was the Miss Tse Ho Tso Middle School Princess, and I represented 

my school well. To be honest I was proud to know my knowledge of my language 

and tradition. 

To me and most of my peers also some adult say our language itself has many 

meanings symbolizing our way of life. My teachers Mrs. Lydia Fasthorse Begay and 

Mrs. Lucy Antone and my grandparents agree with what I’m presenting to you all. 

There support is what I have right now including many others supporters. The 

grievance our grandparents go and still go through is that knowing they couldn’t 

really rely on there grandkids who don’t know nothing of there native tongue. Yes, 

we do have Navajo classes located in our schools but what of the other school that 

don’t? Not all our Dine are learning there language and it hurts me and our parents, mainly our grandparents. Some say our language is on the verge of extinction 

and my generation has a chance on saving our language. How can we, If there is 

only two or three school located in the country who have Navajo classes as one of 

there subjects. We need more Navajo language programs provided to teenagers and 

young children. 

I once saw a move that said ‘‘With Great Power comes Great Responsibility * * *’’ 

and I strongly agree. Our weapon to society is our language and that gives us 

strength to go on and pursue our dreams. From experience I know my Navajo Tradition has made me see beyond what I have thought and wondered about my whole 

life. Being apart of something that means a lot to more than one person is something I have foreseen in my younger days. But many students don’t really have the 

same vision as some of us because they don’t really have the encouragement and 

the classes very few of us young adults have. But the future now holes the truth 

of how our language and tradition can change the course of the future. And I leave 

that up to you all, and if you do consider more school with the Navajo immersion 

classes I’m sure we will have the chance on saving our dine language. 

Thank you for you time and your strong support to keep our Native Immersion 

class going. 

Chairman MCKEON. We only have about 20 minutes left, so Ms. 

Wilson, would you please lead us out in the questioning. 

Mrs. WILSON OF NEW MEXICO. Thank you Mr. Chairman. With 

your permission, I would like to enter into the record a resolution 

of support from All Indian Pueblo Council. 

Chairman MCKEON. No objection. 

42

[The resolution referred to follows:]

The National Congress of American Indians

Resolution #ABQ-03-026

TITLE: Reaffirmation of Tribal expertise on all issues pertaining to heritage language and cultural knowledge

WHEREAS, we, the members of the National Congress of American Indians of the 

United States, invoking the divine blessing of the Creator upon our efforts and 

purposes, in order to preserve for ourselves and our descendants the inherent 

sovereign rights of our Indian nations, rights secured under Indian treaties and 

agreements with the United States, and all other rights and benefits to which 

we are entitled under the laws and Constitution of the United States, to enlighten the public toward a better understanding of the Indian people, to preserve Indian cultural values, and otherwise promote the health, safety and welfare of the Indian people, do hereby establish and submit the following resolution; and

WHEREAS, the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) was established in 

1944 and is the oldest and largest national organization of American Indian and 

Alaska Native tribal governments; and

WHEREAS, universities and colleges historically have been considered the education experts for the training of the teachers of our children;

WHEREAS, the public school system has historically determined the educational 

standards for our children;

WHEREAS, Indian people have been led to believe through the practices of this 

educational system that these standards are the best for our children;

WHEREAS, First peoples’ languages are falling silent due to both past and present 

education and assimilation policies in the United States;

WHEREAS, our heritage languages are an integral part our cultures and identities 

and form the basic medium for the transmission, and thus survival, of our cultures, literatures, histories, religions, political institutions, and values;

WHEREAS, languages are the means of communication for the full range of human 

experiences and are critical to the survival of cultural and political integrity of 

any people;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the NCAI does hereby reaffirm the 

inherent sovereign rights of our Indian nations, rights secured under Indian 

treaties and agreements with the United States, and all other rights and benefits to which we are entitled under the laws and Constitution of the United 

States; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NCAI does hereby reaffirm that sovereign tribal nations are the sole owners of Native cultural property rights and sole experts of their heritage languages and cultural knowledge and shall be consulted 

in all matters regarding the conceptualization, development and implementation of any language/culture initiative, research or program; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that no language/culture policy will be conceptualized, developed or implemented without the direct involvement of sovereign 

tribal nations; and

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that this resolution shall be the policy of NCAI until 

it is withdrawn or modified by subsequent resolution. 

CERTIFICATION

The resolution was adopted at the 60th Annual Session of the National Congress 

of American Indians, held at the Albuquerque Convention Center, Albuquerque, 

New Mexico, on November 21, 2003, with a quorum present. 

Adopted by the General Assembly during 60th Annual Session of the National 

Congress of American Indians, held in Albuquerque, New Mexico, from November 

17-21, 2003. 

Mrs. WILSON OF NEW MEXICO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. 

Cornelius, I have to say any class that can get 2-year-olds to do 

what they are told has more going for it than just language. I want 

to know what the secret is there. I really have one question of realVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:58 Nov 06, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\FC\8-31-06\HED243.000 EDUWK PsN: DICK
43

ly the four of you: Dr. Cornelius, Mr. Ryan, Dr. Sims and Mr. Montoya. 

That is, what are the characteristics of language programs or 

language recovery programs that make them successful? I know 

there are probably some that work better than others. What are 

the things that make a good or successful immersion or recovery 

program and so how do we make sure that this works? And what 

have you seen from your experience? If the four of you would comment on the question, I would appreciate it. 

Mr. WILSON. That’s the first time I have seen Chairman Shije 

give up a mike. What I believe is important in this bill is it creates 

a demonstration project, whatever that may be, to exactly extrapolate what are those elements that make that happen. What we 

have seen through visiting these programs in schools is what Dr. 

Cornelius said is complete immersion, for one thing. That’s a critical element of it. It’s that when you walk through those doors and 

you are around it, you are completely 100 percent immersed in that 

particular language of that tribal community. 

We have spent millions of dollars over the years since this Native 

American Language Act was passed on programs, on activities, on 

camps, on cultural stuff that hasn’t created fluent speakers. What 

we have seen that actually works to create fluent speakers and the 

young people that can complete academically in mainstream is the 

complete immersion. The ownership of the—the panel talked about 

this as well. It’s a sense of validation, sense of ownership in the 

school. You talk to any young people all over. We don’t have these 

big alumni associations to donate back to their schools because 

they never felt that they owned the school in the first place. That’s 

not happening. There’s incredible sense of pride from the students 

coming out of them. 

Ms. SIMS. I think what I would like to add to that is some key 

things that we have observed in terms of language immersion programs that we have here in our own communities, and one thing 

that is very key is that you have people who are trained, who know 

something about language teaching. That’s crucial. That is why we 

advocate so strongly and underscore the need for training native 

speakers who can teach language. 

You must realize for many of our communities this is a fairly 

new thing to be actually teaching language. Because up to a certain 

period of time in our history, languages were strong. Now that we 

have generations who don’t learn or know the languages as their 

first languages, then you need to have folks who understand the 

principles of how languages work. So training is an important one. 

Beyond that, we know that the consistency and the long-term opportunity that children have to learn language is also very key. We 

are not talking about language programs that go from kindergarten 

and suddenly stop at Grade Three. We are talking about the need 

to develop language and let that language grow all the way 

through secondary school and beyond. So that’s another key element. 

The other key element I think that we find especially among our 

programs is—and I don’t know how you quantify this, but it’s an 

element of the teachers using curriculum, using lessons that come 

from the children’s communities themselves. That provides the relVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:58 Nov 06, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\FC\8-31-06\HED243.000 EDUWK PsN: DICK
44

evancy of language teaching and it also provides a way in which 

children learn the context for how the languages are used so that 

ties in the link, the people who come from the community, who are 

trained, that link that comes from using the things that come from 

the community as the vehicles for language teaching, those are 

some of the most critical elements that we see time and time again. 

Ms. CORNELIUS. We tried for a while—we had a program—our 

trainees were still learning but we sent them out to families. And 

the rules were that the family had to make the commitment they 

would all be there. They would turn off the T.V., turn off the telephone, the cell phones, everything. Everything was on hold for that 

couple hours. And what we found was that you would start with 

the family, like the nuclear family, and pretty soon grandma was 

coming and uncles and the aunties were coming and cousins would 

start. Of course, we would have to eat, so it was always around 

suppertime, but we found that to be one of the better ways to learn 

the language. 

But in time, though, there has to be a way to structure around, 

like you are saying, curriculum and units of accomplishment because all the sudden the kids are in basketball and baseball so they 

have other activities, so if we could do it so the families make this 

commitment, say 2 months at suppertime everyday—once a week 

doesn’t work, found that out—everyday we will do the language, be 

learning, and after 2 months take a break and start again for a little while, you know, for a period of time, that that may even help. 

But that family commitment, having the whole family involved 

in the language makes a tremendous difference. I think that’s the 

success of the family nest. That was the grandma who started that 

with the little ones, and was with them all the time. So I think 

that’s critically important. 

Also keeping the culture, the values. Last week our trainees 

went out berry picking. It’s that time of year. But they did it in 

the language. So it’s what you are doing. Then we have a ceremony 

that goes with that, so that the values and the traditions, our beliefs that I must say.—native words—what our mother earth teaches us is incorporated in everything we learn. There’s a lot of ways 

and I have totally back-trained teachers. I think the lessons, too. 

That’s very important. 

Mr. MONTOYA. I think for successful program, it has to be community. You know, you want to have teachers, you want to have 

masters, apprentices, but it has to be something that is committed 

to by the whole community. Because the classroom is wherever you 

are and you create your own opportunities, and many times the 

teacher is looked upon as she is the one that’s going to do it. In 

actuality, the apprentice has to take half the responsibility to say, 

hey, ‘‘Wait a minute, I am just trying to learn. Be patient.’’ They 

have to learn to say, ‘‘Again’’? They have to learn to say, ‘‘Slower,’’ 

so for people like myself, one of the things that I had to learn was 

that we started with vocabulary. We started under the assumption 

that there was no embarrassment and no guilt on the part of the 

people that didn’t know their language. 

And many times I noticed that they were so busy trying to keep 

away from each other what they didn’t know that most of their effort was toward that and it impaired trying to absorb the language. 

45

So the culture has to be there to bring this thing together and everybody pulling toward wanting to learn. Everybody is a master 

and everybody is an apprentice. 

So I think the other consideration that’s very important, you 

have to spend time. Just because you are a fluent speaker doesn’t 

mean that you are a teacher or you have the ability. There has to 

be curricular design. There has to be patience on the part of the 

master. Because I thought that somebody could say something ten 

times and the apprentice would be able to pick it up. Not necessarily so. 

In reading other efforts throughout the world, not just in this 

area, it’s not unreasonable to expect somebody to have to say something 350 times in order to get it right because they didn’t hear it 

well enough, they didn’t say it. They don’t recognize things like toa 

which is meat, and doa which is hip. And they don’t recognize the 

sounds that don’t exist in English. In my language, there’s 15 

sounds that don’t exist in English. 

So in my efforts to teach vocabulary, I ended up having to back 

off of vocabulary and teach how to make sounds like cha, like ta 

like pa. Kind of silent sounds. So now we have characters for all 

of those in our alphabet. We have a 36-character alphabet. It has 

almost all of the sounds of English except C, J, C, X and one more 

letter. I can’t remember what that is. But we do have 15 sounds 

that don’t exist in English and if you are a nonspeaker, you have 

to learn to make those sounds before you can say a word because 

you might say a word and get slapped in the face. So you have to 

get down to some very basics and you have to get rid of the shame 

and get rid of the guilt and it has to be community. 

Mrs. WILSON OF NEW MEXICO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MCKEON. Thank you very much. Mr. Udall. 

Mr. UDALL OF NEW MEXICO. Thank you Mr. Chairman. All of you 

on the panel, I think, a very powerful testimony to support immersion programs, and I think it demonstrated for us how important 

native languages are to continuing native traditions. And we know 

from language experts, I think, a couple things that are important 

here that I want to ask you about. 

First of all, when you have a newborn, a newborn knows and can 

recognize all the sounds needed for learning any language, and we 

also know it’s much easier to learn languages at an early age, and 

if you learn two languages you are then able to learn other languages more quickly. So knowing that and looking at the bills that 

are before this committee, all of these bills create Native American 

immersion programs, which I think we are all in agreement that 

these are very important programs. 

My question goes to the idea of you have what in the bills are 

called language nests which serve children under the age of seven 

and their families, and you have language survival schools serving 

students in elementary and secondary schools. Should we be putting our limited dollars toward the earliest stages or should we be 

spreading them out from the early ages on up? I am just wondering 

if you can comment a little, too, on the kinds of programs. I mean, 

I have seen at many of the Pueblo where they get the grandmas 

and grandpas into Head Start and try to get at those very, very 

early ages. 

46

So what are the mechanisms that we should be utilizing that you 

know about to assist in moving language learning along as quickly 

as possible at the right age? Thank you. Any panelist that would 

like to jump in on that, please. 

Ms. CORNELIUS. What we found is that we are teaching like just 

basic vocabulary with the little ones in the child care and the Head 

Start, but they learn a little prayer they say before they eat. It’s 

just beautiful and I have taught the management people my age 

with that prayer because we don’t want to be behind these little 

kids. They are doing so great. 

But then after you get through Head Start they have the choice, 

they can go to five public schools or to our tribal school. The majority, about 400 and some go to the tribal schools, so there’s another 

1500 going to public schools, and then they lose it. So that’s why 

I really liked in this bill that you were going to do the nest and 

really get them speaking and put them in survival schools so then 

keep on learning and speaking. Otherwise, I have parents come to 

me and say, ‘‘They used to be able to say all of that. Now in third 

grade they don’t know it anymore.’’ I said, ‘‘It’s in there. It’s tucked 

away. But they have gotten out of the chance to learn.’’ So I think 

the emphasis on the little ones and the progression in the school 

they are going to is crucial. 

Ms. SIMS. Limited dollars are always, you know, something that 

all of us, I guess, contend with, especially when you have limited 

resources in communities. From the example that we have here in 

New Mexico of one language nest actually that is the Pueblo of 

Cochiti. Many of the resources that we see are needed, yes, need 

to be put into programs where we provide children that very early 

experience in language development. When you figure that two and 

3-year-olds are just right at the cusp of all kinds of learning, development potential, it makes sense that we start with providing 

funding for those kinds of programs. 

But as well, if we are to realize that these children need that 

support and consistency in language learning throughout their 

school years, then we have to think about those resources also 

spread as well, not just elementary school but also through high 

school. I mention that simply because we see so much of the efforts 

that have gone into early language nests like, say, the Pueblo of 

Cochiti. We see the efforts that some communities put in organizing summer immersion language programs which are community-based efforts. Those should also be available for funding support. We also see the kinds of efforts that are taking place in the 

public schools where we find heritage language programs being implemented. And it’s at that particular stage also, middle school, 

high school, where some of these first kinds of things are—children 

are developing in terms of their identity where that language becomes so crucial, and we see that in the high school immersion 

classes that we do have in two communities, two or three communities here in New Mexico, where secondary kids need that support 

because it really, I think, provides them the kind of foundation that 

prepares them for life-long language learning, not just in schools 

but also beyond. So when you ask where do we spread limited resources, I have to say from the earliest all the way up to the secondary. 

47

Mr. SHIJE. Representative Udall and members of the committee, 

to answer that question I think my viewpoints are probably going 

to be a little different from what you heard. In my own experience, 

I believe when a child is born—because Pueblo themselves here in 

this region, some of them are—a majority of them, let’s say a majority of them are very traditional. So when a child is born, that 

child receives a lot of attention. Not only from the parents but also 

from the grandparents and the close relatives that are nearby. 

Where the child starts encountering some problems as far as the 

language barrier is not in the early ages but once they start going 

to school, because these children at that point in time are receiving 

a lot of pressure. They are under some tremendous pressure from 

not only the parents or relatives telling them that, ‘‘You have to 

learn your language first.’’ They are told that and they try to do 

that to the best of their ability and a lot of them do succeed. But 

when they start going to the school systems, then the school systems is telling them, ‘‘You have to learn English. That is priority 

over your native language.’’ And then all the sudden they are confused. 

They are asking themselves, they are asking their parents, they 

are asking, ‘‘what are he we supposed to do? Which language is 

more important for us’’? And so my thinking is where the monies 

start coming in is right at that age where the students start going 

to school. That’s where the limited funds, as you call it, should be 

sent to the school system. From that point on, I believe the child 

will learn from, as we did, those of us who grew up at my age 

group. We played together, you know, and we always stuck to each 

other. I mean, we don’t see that anymore. These young people have 

cars and they can just jump in the car and go off someplace else, 

and be doing something other than what we grew up doing. 

So my thinking is these funds should be immersed into once a 

child is entering school, from that point on you need to hire staff 

people that can teach these young people the language or anything 

having to do with their culture and tradition. That’s what I talked 

about earlier regarding the Zia Elementary School where one individual was teaching it. That doesn’t do justice to those kids nor 

does it do justice to the teacher because she also has other functions within the school system where she drives the bus or helps 

out with some of the other classroom at the schools. So that would 

be my answer. 

Mr. MONTOYA. We are making a game of catch-up here. The community, in terms of its heritage language, is lacking in the community itself. So in my view, it’s very important that it starts at infancy. But it needs to continue beyond the school level because our 

experience has been that children are going home, beginning to 

speak and ask questions, ‘‘pass the salt,’’ so on at the meal, and 

the parents don’t know what’s going on. So we are trying to build 

curriculums that are responsive at all levels. 

But it’s very important that we start with infancy where they 

can recognize the sounds that don’t exist in English and they need 

the exercise for the tongues to learn how to make those sounds. 

They are going to learn English. There’s no problem with that. But 

they need to learn how to make the sounds that don’t exist in 

English. 

48

Ms. TABAHA. I have to say I have a little brother who is now 2 

years old and I have been teaching him Navajo for I don’t know 

how long now, and I agree that it should start from infancy because, like he said, they need to learn to adjust to the way it is 

taught. 

So what the teachers have been doing and the principal at Navajo immersion has been doing is they have a program that is set 

from six to eight or six to eighth grade teaching Navajo immersion 

only, and another school that is English but it still has Navajo also 

as one of their subjects. 

So what they are shooting for is a school for Navajo from K 

through 12, so students can have a choice of learning our full language fluently and also English fluently so we can know both languages at the same time. I think that’s the way it should be, start 

from infancy, from kindergarten to 12th grade, so you have both 

languages. 

Chairman MCKEON. Thank you very much. Mr. Petri. 

Mr. PETRI. One quick question. I know we are about at the end 

of the allotted time and it’s fascinating. The actual question, I 

know Dr. Cornelius or Mr. Wilson alluded to it in your testimony. 

Of the 300 languages roughly Indian languages that existed in 

North America, it’s down considerably, are they in archived? Are 

they being lost or are they being—even if not spoken are they being 

preserved so people can use them and bring them back as part of 

their culture or are they lost forever. Do you know what the situation is? This might be another area that we should be taking a 

good look at. 

Mr. WILSON. We did a couple surveys. One was funded by the 

Administration for Native Americans and we came up with that 

number after consulting with other people. When we say 300 primary languages pre contact, that’s just the core languages. It’s not 

including the different dialects of those as well, which could be over 

1,000 different ones. When we did the survey what we found, we 

didn’t ask how many languages are still spoken per se. We did find 

that out. To the best of our abilities we came up with a little bit 

over 100 are still used in tribal communities. But out of that, the 

scary thing we found is only 20 of those languages, give or take a 

few, were spoken by children. So we looked at the health of the language isn’t how many languages you have, it’s at what age groups 

is it and the generations and that’s what was really frightening to 

everybody, this crisis. 

When you talk about preservation, we understand that is a word 

that you can look at both ways. One is you preserve a language to 

revitalize it later, but what we have also seen is there’s huge efforts on preserving recorded languages without reviving them and 

creating fluent speakers. 

So there’s a repository set up here at the American Indian Art 

Institute. There’s also the Smithsonian Museum has done a lot 

with the Library of Congress as well, and there’s early 

ethnographers that worked on recording that, too, and there’s been 

a lot of money through ANA that’s gone into recording the language. 

But what we have also seen is this doesn’t create fluent speakers. We don’t want the languages in a jar on the shelf like a butVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:58 Nov 06, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\FC\8-31-06\HED243.000 EDUWK PsN: DICK
49

terfly that’s preserved or whatever. We want them used and that’s 

what we really want. 

Ms. CORNELIUS. They say native peoples are the most studied 

peoples on the face of the earth and we are. Our language has 

been—in the 1930’s through WK Project they first recorded our 

language and linguists created a writing system for it. In the 

1970’s they took those tons of documents and started to translate 

them, so we have them in Oneida, and English underneath the 

Oneida, and then the English. They recorded those. So those were 

sitting in a box of reel-to-reels and cassette tapes and it was like 

fingernails on a chalkboard to me that I knew they were deteriorating so I reassigned one of our young folks—not that young, he 

is about fifty—to archive these. So what he has done is gotten everything from that medium and now they are digitalized. I say that 

word carefully. I had to learn how to pronounce it. 

So we are making those steps but the bigger thing we had to do 

next is to put those—not only just preserved but put on a data base 

so anybody who wants to learn can go and find it on the data base. 

So we are applying for a grant for that, so I go back to grant writing after we are done with this. 

So yes, we are looking at that. Like Mr. Wilson said, all of those 

documents and the studies of us, all the linguistic things have not 

produced a fluent speaker, so we know those are a tool, but to me, 

to be able to find a cassette tape of my great grandma telling a 

story, to hear her voice doing that is just phenomenal. So we are 

preserving. What we are doing with the few elders we have left is 

getting them to tell stories and recording that. So there are a lot 

of materials available. 

Chairman MCKEON. I think that’s very important. That was one 

of the questions that I was wondering about, too, because if you got 

just one person left that can speak, I know you don’t want it in a 

jar but better having it in a jar than nowhere and you need to do 

some intervention there to do that. Sounds like you are doing that. 

We have really come to the end, and I want to thank all of you. 

This has been most educational and most inspirational, I think, to 

hear your stories and most motivational, I think, to get us to do 

something. 

You know, in this country it’s sad but it seems like we think that 

we are only capable of learning and speaking one language. I remember when I took Spanish in high school. It was kind of a waste 

of time because I didn’t really learn Spanish. But in Europe they 

speak six, seven languages. They don’t think anything of it. For 

some reason we never have, as a nation, several nations, have felt 

or been capable of learning more than one language. I think that’s 

a deficiency in our educational process that needs to be looked at. 

Let me tell you, just in wrapping up just a little bit, about my 

family so you know that this is not something hopefully that I 

think that was mentioned, that you look at this a little skeptical 

that maybe this is a show that we are doing that we are not going 

to do anything after this. I want you to know my commitment to 

this. 

I have three grandsons that are one-eight Quapaw. They are 

struggling now learning English. I don’t know if there is a Quapaw 

language because their father only learned, only is just now trying 

50

to engage and get back with his Indian heritage. They went to a 

pow wow—they live in Utah. They went to a pow wow down in 

Oklahoma. My daughter thought boy, these people are going to be 

so happy to see me. They didn’t care about her. They were sure 

glad to see him and involved him in the tribal leadership. It’s just 

a start for them to get back to that culture. So I have Indian 

grandchildren and I am proud of it and I am happy about it. 

When I was serving on my mission here in New Mexico, a lot of 

the families that we visited, and as I said, I was working with 

Latino people, a lot of the families would not teach their children 

Spanish because they said then they will have a accent and won’t 

be able to get a job. Now it’s very important to know Spanish and 

English and especially in California where I am from, and I’m sure 

it is here in New Mexico and Arizona and Texas and many other 

places throughout the country. 

It really saddens me to hear what the Nation has done, what this 

country has done to your nations with stopping you from learning 

the language. I am not concerned about Spanish. I am not concerned about French. There will be lots of people around the world 

speaking those languages. But I am concerned about losing your 

languages so I am committed to doing that. 

I think there are a lot of ways to learn language. You have mentioned you have to have somebody that knows teaching, not just 

the language, but how to teach the language. There’s a difference. 

But, you know, I was in China and I saw millions of little Chinese 

kids that could speak Chinese. The problem is that only now the 

grandparents know, so that generation was skipped so we need to 

teach the children the language. I know that we have through the 

military, and I know the FBI has language training schools in 

Santa Barbara and other places around the country that are very, 

very proficient at teaching languages, so we need to reach out to 

them and find out some of those skills. I know our church has a 

great ability to teach languages. We have language training centers 

where we send our young people and they learn before they go to 

foreign countries to speak lots of languages. I know there’s skills 

that they have to reach out to them to try to get all of those. 

This hearing, we very easily could have held this in Washington. 

That’s where we hold most of our hearings. As you said, this is a 

momentous occasion to have this hearing here. It’s at Heather’s 

urging—Ms. Wilson’s urging, her leadership, her work on the issue 

that we are here, and we will continue to look at her for continued 

leadership on this issue. She is not on the committee. However, I 

sat on Armed Services Committee with her for a long time, and I 

know what a tough proponent she is when she gets behind something, so I know that I will be hearing from her very often with 

this issue. I will be very supportive of all of that. 

So thank you for being here. Thank you for being here. Do you 

want the last word? 

Mr. SHIJE. I just want the record to let you know that I’m going 

to request testimony submittals from the 19 Pueblo Governors, too, 

to be a part of the record so you will be receiving those also, and 

also before we leave, because this is a forum that we are talking 

about language and cultural values, as Pueblo people, we started 

the meeting with the call of the spirits to give us the strength and 

51

wisdom to carry the meeting through. Now before we close we have 

to also release those spirits and send them on their way so they 

can take those messages back. So we will ask that you call on Governor Coriz when the time comes for him to give the closing. 

Chairman MCKEON. I appreciate that. Thank you very much. We 

will hold the record open for you to—seven days? Fourteen days so 

you can add any additional comments. I hope that you will work 

with us as we go through the process. You gave some discussions 

today for changes in the legislation. That’s the process that we 

work through, and we will continue to work on that. We have very 

little time left in the session. I can’t promise we can get it done in 

this session, but we will do our best and see what we can do. Sometimes it’s better not to hurry something, make mistakes. Sometimes we would drag things too long. So we will try to get a balance and get movement on this issue. 

Again, thank you all for being here, and for bearing with us and 

listening through this and with your suggestion, Governor, could 

we ask you to give us a benediction here and the hearing will be 

closed. 

Governor CORIZ. Thank you. Congress and panelists, we were 

discussing how important it is that our child’s early language had 

begun. One of the things as a traditional Pueblo, I think the early 

age where the child is being in the womb of the mother. That’s the 

earliest part of the thing. I think if we are going to promote education, it has to begin from a good, positive, caring loving care that 

our Native people, that we need to carry forth at the earliest possible age in the mother’s womb. 

When the child is born into this world he has to have love and 

care and the child has been loved by the mother when he comes 

into this world. Very innocent child born into this world. Thank 

you. 

[Benediction spoken in Native American language.] 

And have a good holiday. 

[Whereupon, at 4:40 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

[Additional testimony submitted for the record follow:] 

[The prepared statement of Ms. McCollum of Minnesota follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Betty McCollum, a Representative in Congress 

From the State of Minnesota 

I regret that I cannot attend today’s field hearing—‘‘Recovery and Preservation of 

Native American Languages.’’ There has long been an urgent need to recover and 

preserve Native American languages and to reaffirm the Federal government’s commitment to strengthening Native American education, and today’s hearing is an important step in reinvigorating the Federal government’s partnership with Native 

people and communities. 

As a nation we must reaffirm our commitment to preserve, to honor, and to teach 

the living traditions, cultures, and languages of the First Americans who have and 

continue to contribute to the strength of our nation and communities as teachers, 

community leaders, business owners, artists, elected officials, and neighbors. 

The National Indian Education Association, which speaks on issues on behalf of 

Native Americans, continues to identify the recovery and preservation of Native languages as one of their highest priorities. I strongly support their efforts. 

As a country, I believe we have a moral obligation to live up to the commitment 

of the laws and executive orders that promise the incorporation of Native culture 

in education, such as Title VII. The facts cannot be ignored—decades of federal restrictions on the instruction and use of Native languages in everyday life led to a 

deliberate and regrettable decline in Native languages spoken. As a country we 

must commit the resources to recover and preserve Native languages and to ensure 

52

that Native students receive the unique cultural education, including language, 

promised to them. 

Unfortunately, if we continue down the path we are on—it is estimated that only 

twenty indigenous languages will be viable by 2050. This would be shameful. 

Within the state of Minnesota, there are two tribal nations—the Dakota Nation 

and the Ojibwe Nation with eleven reservations. Across these different reservations, 

language dialects vary. While much more can be done to strengthen these languages, the Dakota language is doing fairly well. In fact, there are significant numbers of elders teaching language to youth-especially in Head Start programs. 

But in Minnesota, it is only becoming more difficult to find elders to teach the 

Ojibwe language—the fourth most spoken Native language in North America, which 

has 10,000 speakers. 

Like in other parts of the nation, there are additional, smaller indigenous languages across the state of Minnesota—but the efforts to recover and preserve them 

have been difficult because the populations are so small. 

This cannot be the fate of any more indigenous languages. 

While Minnesota has a variety of language resources available at area colleges, 

schools and organizations, these learning arenas continue to need our support more 

than ever. 

In the urban areas of Minneapolis and St. Paul, American Indian language instruction and learning has been hindered due to the small and diverse number of 

tribes and languages represented in their community-but this should not hinder efforts to foster language preservation and revitalization. In fact, within the Minneapolis and St. Paul areas, community language tables are held and it is these 

types of efforts that must continue to be fostered and developed. These are the kinds 

of efforts that must be supported by the federal government. And Native Americans 

are right to request the help of Congress. 

Unfortunately, it appears that despite treaties and laws and executive orders that 

call for the preservation and incorporation of Native language and culture into education-we are living at a time when Native American languages and culture are 

being eroded and neglected. 

And, despite significant research that indicates Native children do better in all 

subjects when taught through the use of Native languages and culture-Title VII 

funding and other Indian education resources are being reduced or inappropriately 

assigned to Title I functions of the No Child Left Behind law. 

I am concerned about recent policies put forth by this Administration that have 

weakened Native education through the weakening of Title VII—which will negatively affect the preservation and recovery of Native languages and culture. 

Schools and Title VII administrations have felt pressure to focus Title VII resources-specifically set aside for Native children-on Title I goals-which have nothing 

to do with Native culture and language. 

Schools should be able to focus Title VII resources on Title VII goals-this funding 

should not be siphoned off and diverted to support the other goals of NCLB—especially at the expense of Native culture and the children set to inherit it. 

Native children are guaranteed the right to not only the highest quality education-but also a unique and culturally relevant education that includes Native language instruction. 

It is for these reasons that I joined with several of my colleagues in sending a 

letter to the Secretary of Education requesting a clarification of the Department of 

Education’s policy towards Title VII. 

The response I received did not address the concerns I heard from the Native 

community—and I will continue to press the Bush Administration to ensure the 

unique and high quality educational opportunities Native children deserve-and have 

been promised. 

I submit for the record both the letter to the Secretary and her response. 

I commend the work of those who refuse to allow Native language and culture 

to disappear and who instead work to strengthen and preserve Native languagessuch as the National Indian Education Association. Your efforts are important and 

necessary and I look forward to continued work with you on this critical issue. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Gregory follows:]

Prepared Statement of Dr. George Ann Gregory, Choctaw/Cherokee 

I grew up without the benefit of either my mother or my father’s Native languages. Not having those languages breaks me from the past of my peoples. Language represents reality, so I do not have that reality. And this is a loss to me. It 

53

is a loss to my peoples. It is a loss to this nation. This country is losing its original 

languages and being completely supplanted by the colonial language of English. I 

would like to note that there has never been a time in history when multilingualism 

was more needed, and the US is losing that ability. 

A year ago in May, I returned from New Zealand, where I spent four months as 

a Fulbright scholar studying Maori language revitalization. The Maori have been 

working on this for about 30 years now. Thirty years ago, the Maori language was 

spoken primarily by people over 50 years of age. It was a dying language. Today, 

there are young Maori entering graduate school, who started off in the immersion 

kohanga reo (language nests) and English is their Second Language: They are able 

to function academically in two languages now. As in the US, English is in little 

danger of disappearing. It is everywhere. 

The revitalization of the Maori language has gone hand-in-hand with economic 

and educational development by Maori communities. By that I mean that regaining 

their own language has given many Maori the self-confidence to achieve more in 

both their own traditions and in the current technological, economic development of 

New Zealand itself. It has improved their citizenship and their contribution to both 

ways of life. Additionally, the non-Maori, the Pakeha, have also benefited because 

as one group of people advances so do all groups. Many non-Maori are learning te 

reo Maori (the language) and embracing it alongside English. 

What could be more American than speaking an American language? (English, as 

you know, is the language of the UK and its former colonies.) US culture is a blend 

of many contributions by many groups, but at its core lie the indigenous peoples of 

the US. This is its foundation. Certainly better authors and authorities than I have 

pointed this out. Our brand of ‘‘democracy’’ is truly American: It comes by way of 

the Iroquois Confederacy. It strikes me as particularly unkind and ungrateful not 

to help the original peoples of this nation, who have contributed so greatly to its 

formation (through land cession is nothing else), maintain their own identities 

through language. As we live in a monetary age, this support should come in the 

form of increasing grants to Native communities for maintaining and revitalizing 

their own languages. 

Yakoke and wado (thanks). 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Wacondo follows:]

Prepared Statement of Elizabeth Wacondo, Librarian, the Laguna Public 

Library, Pueblo of Laguna 

Many people my age have spoken the language fluently, but as the years have 

gone by our younger generation do not speak the language, because we are going 

into the modern age. Our young parents do not speak the language so they can not 

teach their children. 

I believe that it is in the home where we need to teach our siblings. I myself was 

taught the language by my grandparents. I was also taught that while we are at 

the table eating this is the time when we need to teach our young children; in order 

for them to swallow the words and meanings we are teaching them as well as manners. 

I grew up with parents who spoke the language and who taught me tales, that 

someday I might teach our young people. The tales that I was taught were winter 

tales, because we did not have electricity, no radios or television. When our school 

homework was done we would sit on the floor on sheep pelts, maybe in front of the 

fire place; if we had one. And one of the elders’ would teach us and tell these tales. 

I have had ‘‘Winter Tales’’ book published. 

I am sure the Laguna Schools have gotten Grants to pay for someone to teach 

our young children the language. 

I have been the Director and Solo Librarian for Pueblo of Laguna for 31 years. 

[The prepared statement of Eddie Tso follows:]

Prepared Statement of Eddie Tso, Program Director, Office of Dine ́

Culture, Department of Dine ́ Education, the Navajo Nation 

Program 

The Office of Dine ́ Culture, Language & Community Services coordinates with 

teachers, schools and communities within the three state area of NM, UT and AZ 

to develop and implement Dine ́ (Navajo) Culture Standards and Curriculum; Dine ́

54

*Note: This article from ‘‘Native American Review’’ is adapted from a presentation on Nurturing Native Languages and Cultures in Schools the author gave at the National Indian School 

Board Association’s Summer Institute in Denver in July 2006. 

(Navajo) Language Standards; Curriculum guide for Dine ́ (Navajo) Government and 

History; Dine ́ (Navajo) Language Assessment Instrument; and Dine ́ (Navajo) language Certification with New Mexico Department of Public Education and Utah 

State Department of Education. 

The Navajo Nation on July 22, 2005 enacted the Navajo Sovereignty in Education 

Act of 2005, amending Title 10 of the Navajo Nation Code to establish the Navajo 

Nation Department of Dine ́ Education to confirm the commitment of the Navajo Nation to the education of the Navajo People and provides a vehicle for implementation 

of specific Navajo language and culture policies for the schools serving children on 

the Navajo Nation. 

Proposed Amendments to the Native American Language Act:

1. Native Americans should be recognized as the owner of their Language. With 

this ownership, Native Americans should partner towards the goal of strengthening, 

revitalizing, or reestablishing a American language and culture as a living language 

and culture of daily life. (Native Americans are not recognized nor involve in these 

plans and development. Native government must be eligible to be involved in the 

revitalization of language and culture) 

2. Applicants shall inform, coordinate and collaborate with Native Governments, 

Native Education Committees, Native Boards of Education and/or Native Department of Education in applying, implementing, monitoring, reporting, and the sharing of project information, etc. (Too often, schools will not involved Native organizations on grants or plans on Native language and culture). 

3. Applicants should inform, coordinate and collaborate with other schools on 

their application. (Too often, schools receiving these grants don’t want to share information, and best practices; and schools claim ownership of the materials developed). 

4. Applicants who are considered as demonstration programs should become models for the Native area or reservation by informing and sharing their plans and successes with schools and Native governments. (Too often, demonstration program 

claim ownership on their language and culture projects and do not involve Native 

communities and government) 

5. Applicants should be required to spend their award funds on specific Native 

Language and culture programs, not other school projects. (Too often, schools may 

use project funding to accommodate other needs) 

6. Federal and State policies on Native American Education should be changed 

to incorporate Native teaching on culture, language, government and history in 

school curricula. (No Child Left Behind advocates English Only and Arizona Proposition 203 is an English Only proposition, not Native American language, culture, 

government or history) 

7. Federal and State policies on education should be required that do not let local 

School Superintendent dictate their own policies and plans, leaving out the 

strengthening, revitalizing, or reestablishing of Native America language and culture. (Too often, School Superintendents leave out the teaching of Native language, 

culture, government and history) 

8. The law should support the funding of the Institute of American Indian Education on the UMN campus to provide technical assistance to tribes and pueblos in 

strengthening, revitalizing, or reestablishing Native American language and culture. 

(Tribes and Pueblos need technical assistance in development of curriculum, policies, research, etc., as related to language and culture revitalization) 

[Native American Review article follows:]

Native American Review Article by Jon Reyhner, Ed.D., Professor of 

Education, Northern Arizona University*

The National Indian Education Association and National Congress of American 

Indians are currently supporting legislation to help revive tribal languages in immersion programs where in the primary grades students are taught all day in their 

tribal language. Their goal is to stem the rapidly accelerating decline in the number 

of speakers of tribal languages, which some conservative commentators see as a 

good thing. John J. Miller, author of The Unmaking of Americans: How 

Multiculturalism Has Undermined America’s Assimilation Ethic, declared in The 

55

Wall Street Journal in 2002 that the increasing pace of language death is ‘‘a trend 

that is arguably worth celebrating [because] age-old obstacles to communication are 

collapsing’’ and primitive societies are being brought into the modern world.’’

However, there are a number of reasons why all Americans, even conservatives, 

should support Native language revitalization. Conservatives like Arizona State 

Representative J.D. Hayworth promote assimilation into American society, including 

speaking only English, as the solution to America’s social problems. However, assimilation today for teenagers, whether it is for recent immigrants or American Indians, is all too likely to mean a television dominated world that is selfish, pleasureseeking, and fattening. 

The larger school-based immersion efforts to revitalize indigenous languages in 

New Zealand and Hawai’i and smaller efforts in the Blackfeet, Navajo, Mohawk and 

other Indian Nations are showing that language revitalization can help heal the 

wounds of colonialism and improve students’ behavior and academic success. 

There is a need for healing because through most of the history of the United 

States the Indian way of life was considered ‘‘savage’’ and something to be replaced 

by English speaking civilization that would unite this country. As Joy Harjo 

(Muscogee Creek) notes, ‘‘colonization teaches us to hate ourselves. We are told that 

we are nothing until we adopt the ways of the colonizer, till we become the colonizer.’’ But even then Native people are often not accepted—a brown skin can’t be 

washed off. For most of history, schooling systematically devalued being Indian. 

In 1869 after the Civil War (America’s bloodiest war where both the North and 

South spoke English), President Ulysses S. Grant’s Indian Peace Commissioners 

concluded that language differences led to misunderstandings and that ‘‘by educating the children of these tribes in the English language these differences would 

have disappeared, and civilization would have followed at once.’’ Teacher and Indian 

agent Albert H. Kneale in the early twentieth century found that ‘‘the Indian Bureau, at that time, went on the assumption that any Indian custom was, per se, objectionable, whereas the customs of whites were the ways of civilization.’’ As was 

noted on a sign at the entrance of the Ganado Mission School in the Navajo Nation 

in the 1950s, ‘‘tradition’’ was seen as ‘‘the enemy of progress.’’

Well-meaning ‘‘friends of the Indians’’ did not realize the damage that 

assimilationist education could inflict on Indian people. In 1975, Dillon Platero, the 

first director of the Navajo Division of Education, described the experience of ‘‘Kee,’’ 

a typical Navajo student: ‘‘Kee was sent to boarding school as a child where—as was 

the practice—he was punished for speaking Navajo. Since he was only allowed to 

return home during Christmas and summer, he lost contact with his family. Kee 

withdrew from both the White and Navajo worlds as he grew older because he could 

not comfortably communicate in either language. He became one of the many thousand Navajos who were non-lingual—a man without a language. By the time he was 

16, Kee was an alcoholic, uneducated, and despondent—without identity.’’ Students 

who are not embedded in their traditional values are only too likely in modern 

America to pick up a drug-filled identity of consumerism, consumption, competition, 

comparison, and conformity. 

A second reason to support Native language immersion is to improve students’ behavior. In 1998 the National Research Council reported that immigrant youth tend 

to be healthier than their counterparts from nonimmigrant families. It found that 

the longer immigrant youth are in the U.S., the poorer their overall physical and 

psychological health. The more ‘‘Americanized’’ they became the more likely they 

were to engage in risky behaviors such as substance abuse, unprotected sex, and 

delinquency. There is evidence the same is true for Native youth, with those being 

less assimilated into the dominant culture doing better in school and in life. 

The positive effects of Native language and culture can be found in schools that 

have given strong Native language support. Agnes and Wayne Holm reported that 

in the 1970s the all-Navajo Rock Point Community School Board felt ‘‘that it was 

the breakdown of a working knowledge of Navajo kinship that caused much of what 

they perceived as inappropriate, un-Navajo, behavior; the way back, they felt was 

to teach students that system.’’ Their answer was to establish a bilingual education 

program with an extensive Navajo Social Studies component that included the theory of Navajo kinship. 

The Rock Point Program was modified and is continued today in the Window Rock 

Public School’s Navajo Immersion School. Marie Arviso and Wayne Holm found 

there that ‘‘More-traditional Navajo expectations of children were that they would 

work hard and act responsibly—in adultlike ways. Anglos [‘‘white’’ people] tend to 

expect children to act in more childlike ways. * * * More-traditional parents tend 

to perceive such [childlike] behavior as self-indulgent and irresponsible. At worst, 

children come to exploit the gap between parental and teacher expectations.’’ In the 

56

Navajo immersion school students tended to act more responsibly as that was the 

behavior that was taught and expected. 

A researcher for Arizona State University’s Native Educators Research Project observed at Window Rock that, ‘‘Navajo values are embedded in the classroom.’’ A parent, ‘‘noticed a lot of differences compared to the other students who aren’t in the 

immersion program. [The immersion students] seem more disciplined and have a lot 

more respect for older [people], well anyone, like teachers. They communicate better 

with their grandparents, their uncles. * * * [It] makes them more mature and more 

respectful. I see other kids and they just run around crazy.’’

Navajo elder and statesman Jack Jackson noted at the 2004 BIA Office of Indian 

Education Programs’ third annual Language and Culture Preservation Conference 

in Albuquerque how at Dine ́ College they are ‘‘in a search to create our future based 

on our past.’’ Jackson emphasizes the importance of teaching Navajos their philosophy of ‘‘Ke ́,’’ being a balanced person. This involves examining ‘‘beauty before me 

[where am I going?], beauty behind me [where did I come from?], beauty underneath 

[my relation to mother earth], beauty above, and beauty around’’ with the outcome 

of becoming a ‘‘balanced person.’’

A third reason to support Native language immersion schools is to improve students’ academic success. Reviews of research on fluent bilinguals indicate they have 

some cognitive advantages over monolinguals and are thus more intelligent (See for 

example Colin Baker’s Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, Multilingual Matters, 2006). 

A conflict between a student’s home culture and the school culture can lead to 

academic problems for students. Mick Fedullo in Light of the Feather Pathways 

Through Contemporary Indian America (1992) illustrates a case of cultural conflict 

with a quote from an Apache elder who stated that students’ parents had, ‘‘been to 

school in their day, and what that usually meant was a bad BIA boarding school. 

And all they remember about school is that there were all these Anglos trying to 

make them forget they were Apaches; trying to make them turn against their parents, telling them that Indian ways were evil.’’ Instead of assimilating, ‘‘a lot of 

those kids came to believe that their teachers were the evil ones, and so anything 

that had to do with ‘‘education’’ was also evil—like books. Those kids came back to 

the reservation, got married, and had their own kids. And now they don’t want anything to do with the white man’s education. The only reason they send their kids 

to school is because it’s the law. But they tell their kids not to take school seriously. 

So, to them, printed stuff is white-man stuff.’’

Unfortunately, efforts to reduce the cultural divide between schools and Indian 

homes is being hurt today by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 that is driving 

education today in America. Its ‘‘Reading First’’ approach to teaching reading is just 

one example. Bruno Bettelheim and Karen Zelan in their book On Learning to Read 

write, ‘‘If, rather than concentrating on developing reading skills, educational efforts 

from the very beginning were concentrated on developing the desire to become literate—essentially and inner attitude to reading—then the final result might be that 

a much larger segment of the adult population would be literate. In our present situation, most adults are able to read but see little purpose in reading, beyond gaining some specific information in which they are interested or as a means for killing 

time through some trite diversion.’’

While it is rightly pointed out by critics of the ‘‘Whole Language’’ approach to 

teaching reading that this inner attitude’’ is not enough to produce good readers, 

it is a consideration that teachers would do well not to forget as they teach reading 

skills. As Jonathan Kozel pointed out at the National Indian School Board Association’s 2006 Summer Institute, the US Department of Education’s ‘‘Reading First’’ 

program that emphasizes phonics first tends to put reading comprehension last, and 

I would add pretty much ignores student motivation. 

Student motivation is critical for their success. Nineteenth Century missionary 

Stephen R. Riggs who in 1852 published a Grammar and Dictionary of the Dakota 

Language found teaching English ‘‘to be very difficult and not producing much apparent fruit.’’ It was not the students’ lack of ability that prevented them from 

learning English, but rather their unwillingness. ‘‘Teaching Dakota was a different 

thing. It was their own language.’’ Giving Indian students some choices about what 

they learn and curricular content that reinforces their Native identity helps them 

succeed in school. 

As Indian languages are forgotten along with the values that allowed Indian people to survive for thousands of years, Indian people lose a critical foundation to 

build healthy lives around. As Mary Smith, the last speaker of her Native Eyak language, ‘‘It’s sad to be the last speaker of your language. Please, turn back to your 

own and learn your language so you won’t be alone like me. Go to the young people. 

Let go of the hate in your hearts. Love and respect yourselves first. Elders please 

57

give them courage and they will never be alone. Help our people to understand their 

identity. We need to publish materials for our people. To educate the white people 

to us and for indigenous people.’’

University of California Professor Leanne Hinton maintains, ‘‘Believing in the language brings the generations together. * * * If there’re any seeds left, there’s an 

opportunity to grow.’’ It is not just the language that gets revitalized in exemplary 

immersion programs, it is the values that have given Indian Nations the strength 

to survive five centuries of oppression. 

[The prepared statement of the Washington State Tribal Leader 

Congress follows:]

Prepared Statement of the Washington State Tribal Leader Congress on 

Education on Recovery and Preservation of Native American Languages 

Washington State Tribes reaffirm the sovereignty of Federally Recognized Tribal 

Governments in all areas, particularly in the transmission of native language and 

culture. Tribal Sovereignty requires that individual Tribal governments protect and 

perpetuate their native languages and cultures in a manner that honors the integrity of the original teachings. The Tribes acknowledge the considerable educational 

expertise, resources, and responsibilities of the United States Government, State 

legislatures, and local school boards in providing a meaningful education for all children. We are enthusiastic about building co-governance structures with federal, 

state, and local jurisdictions; however, the final responsibility for the education of 

Tribal members resides with Tribal governments. 

In response to HR 4766 (funding for Tribal Immersion Programs), the Washington 

State Tribal Leader Congress on Education strongly supports the allocation of federal dollars to fund the revitalization of Native Language and the expansion of Native Language Programs. The Federal Government has treaty and trust responsibilities to fund education for our children. Allocating Federal dollars for language revitalization and program expansion honors this responsibility. 

At the same time, we do not support mandates placed on the Tribes by the Federal Government or its agencies that undermine the sovereignty of Tribal governments in educating their Tribal members. 

• HR 4766 places such mandates on Tribes by requiring specific methodology, 

contact hours, student-parent participation levels and outcomes, etc. as prerequisites for funding. With these eligibility requirements, HR 4766 fails to recognize the Tribe’s expertise in transmitting its own language and culture and compromises the Tribal government’s sovereignty in education. 

• HR 4766 also places the responsibility for the evaluation of Tribal Immersion 

Programs with a major US University. In actuality, the final responsibility for program evaluation and success resides with the individual Tribal governments. 

The Tribes are committed to high quality standards in all education programs and 

most emphatically in the transmission of language and culture. Tribal Governments 

want high quality standards for funding requirements, program evaluation, and program implementation, including such areas as curriculum development, pedagogy, 

and teacher training and certification. However, the Tribes themselves determine 

the standards that will impact the education of Tribal members. 

The goal of the Tribal Leader Congress is to work with federal law makers and 

the Department of Education to craft legislation that brings new funding streams 

to culture and language education while utilizing Tribal expertise and respecting 

Tribal sovereignty. We also look forward to working together with government and 

other relevant organizations, such as research universities, in implementing language programs, evaluating these programs, and creating the requirements for federal funding. 

The Washington State Tribal Leaders Congress on Education is a positive model 

of how Tribes, individually and collectively, can work with lawmakers, agencies, universities, local school districts, and the community to build co-governance in education and create language and culture legislation to benefit all children. 

Thank you very much for your leadership in bringing funding to the revitalization 

of our sacred languages. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Cross-Maple follows:]

58

INDIAN EDUCATION DIVISION, 

NEW MEXICO PUBLIC EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, 

August 31, 2006. 

Native Language Initiatives Update 

Introduction 

The New Mexico State Legislature enacted the Indian Education Act in 2003. The 

purpose of the Act is to ensure equitable and culturally relevant learning environments for Native American students in New Mexico public schools through the 

study, development and implementation of practices that positively affect educational success. The Act, also sought to develop strategies for ensuring the maintenance of Native languages through partnerships with tribes for developing tribal 

standards and criteria for the certification of Native teachers to teach Native languages in the public schools. 

Maintenance of Native Languages 

As part of implementing the Act, the Indian Education Division (IED) of the New 

Mexico Public Education Department (NMPED) has: 

• developed Joint Powers Agreements with tribes and pueblos to create tribal and 

pueblo standards and criteria for licensing Native American language teachers; and 

• provided funding to tribes and pueblos to develop native language instruction 

and materials for their community, using various language models for development 

of native language. 

Successes 

In 2005–2006, the IED secured the first-ever Joint Powers Agreements (JPAs) 

with nine New Mexico Indian tribes and pueblos to assist them in developing tribal 

standards and criteria for licensing Native American language teachers, and to implement revitalization and preservation of native language programs in their communities. The nine JPAs are with: Jemez Pueblo, Acoma Pueblo, San Felipe Pueblo, 

Santa Clara Pueblo, Pojoaque Pueblo, Zia Pueblo, Mescalero Apache Tribe, Cochiti 

Pueblo, and Laguna Pueblo. 

For 2006–2007, thirteen JPA’s are either continuing or in process with Ohkay 

Owingeh, Nambe Pueblo, the Navajo Nation, Santa Ana Pueblo, Santo Domingo 

Tribe, Jemez Pueblo, Acoma Pueblo, San Felipe Pueblo, Santa Clara Pueblo, 

Pojoaque Pueblo, Mescalero Apache Tribe, Cochiti Pueblo and Laguna Pueblo. 

Currently, 10 Memorandum of Agreements (MOAs) are signed between the 

NMPED and tribes and pueblos regarding Native American Language Certification. 

The ten are with: Jicarilla Apache, Santa Clara, Acoma, Laguna, Zuni, Navajo Nation, Santo Domingo, Ohkay Owingeh, Mescalero, and Santa Ana. These tribes have 

completed or begun the development of their tribal standards and native language 

teacher certification criteria and process. As a result, there are now 69 native language teachers who are certified by the New Mexico Public Education Department 

to teach in the native languages. 

Support of HR 4766

The NMPED supports the passage of HR 4766 to provide additional funds for 

tribes to support their efforts in maintaining their native languages. Resources are 

needed for the development of instructional materials and language instruction by 

licensed native teachers both in schools where their children attend each day and 

in their own communities.

Æ