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

87–260 PDF 2003

S. HRG. 108–107

NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGES ACT

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH 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

WASHINGTON, DC

(
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado, Chairman

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Vice Chairman

JOHN McCAIN, Arizona,

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma

GORDON SMITH, Oregon

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota

HARRY REID, Nevada

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington

PAUL MOOREHEAD, Majority Staff Director/Chief Counsel

PATRICIA M. ZELL, Minority Staff Director/Chief Counsel

(II)
(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

S. 575, text of ........................................................................................................... 2

Statements:

Brown, William Y., director, Bishop Museum, Honolulu, HI ....................... 55

Cheek, John, director, National Indian Education Association, Alexandria, VA .......................................................................................................... 58

Chock, Jennifer, director, Program Planning and Development .................. 55

Coosewon, Rita, Comanche language instructor, Comanche Nation College, Lawton, OK .......................................................................................... 38

Dinwoodie, David, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM ................................................................................... 57

Demmert, Jr., William, Professor of Education, Woodring College of Education, Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA ....................... 30

DesRosier, Joycelyn, Piegan Institute/Nizipuhwahsin School, Browning,

MT ..................................................................................................................

37

Hermes, Mary, assistant professor of education, University of Minnesota,

Duluth, MN ................................................................................................... 49

Herrera, Carla, Pueblo DeCochiti ................................................................... 26

Hinton, Leanne, president, Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas, Berkely, CA .......................................................... 24

Ho’opai, Holo, student, Ke Kula ‘o Nawahiokalani’opu’u, Hawaii, University of Hawaii at Hilo, Hilo, HI ................................................................... 44

Inouye, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii, vice chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs ............................................................................... 1

Kaplan, Lawrence D., director, Alaska Native Language Center, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK ................................................... 47

Kawaiaea, Keiki, director, Kahuawaiola Indigenous Teacher Education

Program, and director, Hale Kuamoo Hawaiian Language Center, Ka

Haka Ula o Keelikolani (Hawaiian College) ............................................... 42

LaPier, Rosalyn, Piegan Institute/Nizipuhwahsin School, Browning, MT .. 35

LaRonge, Lisa, Ojibwe Language Immersion School, Hayward, WI ............ 49

Leno, Vina, Acoma Pueblo ............................................................................... 26

Navarro, Geneva, Comanche language instructor, Comanche Nation College, Lawton, OK .......................................................................................... 38

Pecos, Travis, Pueblo DeCochiti ...................................................................... 26

Rawlins, Namaka, director, ’Aha Punana Leo, Inc., Hilo, HI ....................... 46

Romero, Mary Eunice, College of Education, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ ........................................................................................................... 28

Silva, Kalena, director, Ka Haka ‘Ula o Ke’ Elikolani College, University

of Hawaii at Hilo, Hilo, HI ........................................................................... 42

Sims, Christine, chairwoman, Linguistic Institute for Native Americans

and member of Pueblo of Acoma, NM ......................................................... 26

Wilson, William, Ka Haka ‘Ula o Ke’ Elikolani College, University of

Hawaii at Hilo, Hilo, HI ............................................................................... 44

Worl, Rosita, Sealaska Heritage Institute, University of Alaska Southeast, Juneau, AK ........................................................................................... 33

APPENDIX

Prepared statements:

Brown, William Y. ............................................................................................ 65

Cheek, John ...................................................................................................... 69

Coosewon, Rita (with letter) ............................................................................ 75

Demmert, Jr., William (with attachment) ...................................................... 78

DesRosier, Joycelyn .......................................................................................... 63
Page

IV

Prepared statements—Continued

Dinwoodie, David .............................................................................................. 84

Hermes, Mary ................................................................................................... 91

Hinton, Leanne ................................................................................................. 94

Ho’opai, Holo ..................................................................................................... 99

Inouye, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii, vice chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs ............................................................................... 61

Kaplan, Lawrence D. ........................................................................................ 101

Kawaiaea, Keiki ................................................................................................ 104

Krauss, Michael E., founding director, Alaska ative Language Center ....... 101

La Marr, Cindy, president-elect, National Indian Education Association ... 109

LaPier, Rosalyn ................................................................................................ 113

McCarty, Ph.D., Teresa L. (with Attachments) ............................................. 116

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, U.S. Senator from Alaska ......................................... 62

Navarro, Geneva (with attachment) ............................................................... 126

Rawlins, Namaka ............................................................................................. 129

Romero, Mary Eunice ....................................................................................... 135

Sims, Christine ................................................................................................. 140

Wilson, William ................................................................................................ 145

Additional material submitted for the record:

Albers, Patricia C., professor and chairperson, Department of American

Indian Studies, University of Minnesota (letter) ....................................... 151

Blackfeet Nation (resolution) ........................................................................... 153

From Ocean Icons To Prime Suspects, Blaine Harden, Washington Post

article ............................................................................................................. 155

Sealaska Heritage Institute (proposed amendments) .................................... 157
(1)

NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGES ACT

THURSDAY, MAY 15, 2003

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:42 a.m. in room

485, Russell Senate Building, Hon. Daniel K. Inouye (vice chairman of the committee) presiding.

Present: Senators Inouye, Campbell, and Murkowski.

STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE, U.S. SENATOR FROM

HAWAII, VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

Senator INOUYE. I am sorry for all this inconvenience. I hope you

will forgive us. We have 34 amendments remaining on the tax bill,

and it is considered a very important measure, so it will be stop

and go for a while. But I can assure you that I will be here all day

and all night, if necessary.

I have an opening statement, but I think all of you will agree

with me that language is important; it is a link to the past, and

I think it is an anchor for the future. We, in Hawaii, like the native

people of Indian country, had to go through an experience where,

forcibly, native languages were taken away. But today I am happy

to report to you that in the State of Hawaii, the Hawaiian language

is one of the State’s official languages is taught in public schools,

and we have found by studies and experience that those who are

in the language immersion program generally have better academic

performance; we have more students seeking higher education

going through this method.

[Prepared statement of Senator Inouye appears in appendix.]

[Text of S. 575 follows:]
2

1

II

108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 575

To amend the Native American Languages Act to provide for the support

of Native American language survival schools, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 7, 2003

Mr. INOUYE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Indian Affairs

A BILL

To amend the Native American Languages Act to provide

for the support of Native American language survival

schools, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Native American Lan5 guages Act Amendments Act of 2003’’.

6 SEC. 2. PURPOSES.

7 The purposes of this Act are—

8 (1) to encourage and support, consistent with

9 the policy of the United States as expressed in the
3

2

•S 575 IS

1 Native American Languages Act (25 U.S.C. 2901 et

2 seq.)—

3 (A) the development of Native American

4 language survival schools as innovative means

5 of addressing the effects of past discrimination

6 against Native American language speakers;

7 and

8 (B) the revitalization of Native American

9 languages through—

10 (i) education in Native American lan11 guages; and

12 (ii) instruction in other academic sub13 jects using Native American languages as

14 an instructional medium;

15 (2) to demonstrate the positive effects of Native

16 American language survival schools on the academic

17 success of Native American students and the stu18 dents’ mastery of standard English;

19 (3) to encourage and support the involvement

20 of families in the educational and cultural survival

21 efforts of Native American language survival schools;

22 (4) to encourage communication, cooperation,

23 and educational exchange among Native American

24 language survival schools and the administrators of

25 Native American language survival schools;
4

3

•S 575 IS

1 (5) to provide support for Native American lan2 guage survival school facilities and endowments;

3 (6) to provide support for Native American lan4 guage nests—

5 (A) as part of Native American language

6 survival schools; or

7 (B) as separate programs that will be de8 veloped into more comprehensive Native Amer9 ican language survival schools;

10 (7) to support the development of local and na11 tional models that can be disseminated to the public

12 and made available to other schools as exemplary

13 methods of teaching Native American students; and

14 (8) to develop a support center system for Na15 tive American language survival schools at the uni16 versity level.

17 SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

18 Section 103 of the Native American Languages Act

19 (25 U.S.C. 2902) is amended to read as follows:

20 ‘‘SEC. 103. DEFINITIONS.

21 ‘‘In this title:

22 ‘‘(1) ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.—The term ‘ele23 mentary school’ has the meaning given the term in

24 section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Edu25 cation Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
5

4

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘(2) INDIAN.—The term ‘Indian’ has the mean2 ing given the term in section 7151 of the Elemen3 tary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20

4 U.S.C. 7491).

5 ‘‘(3) INDIAN RESERVATION.—The term ‘Indian

6 reservation’ has the meaning given the term ‘res7 ervation’ in section 3 of the Indian Financing Act of

8 1974 (25 U.S.C. 1452).

9 ‘‘(4) INDIAN TRIBAL GOVERNMENT.—The term

10 ‘Indian tribal government’ has the meaning given

11 the term in section 502 of the Indian Environmental

12 General Assistance Program Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C.

13 4368b).

14 ‘‘(5) INDIAN TRIBE.—The term ‘Indian tribe’

15 has the meaning given the term in section 4 of the

16 Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance

17 Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).

18 ‘‘(6) NATIVE AMERICAN.—The term ‘Native

19 American’ means—

20 ‘‘(A) an Indian;

21 ‘‘(B) a Native American Pacific Islander;

22 and

23 ‘‘(C) a Native Hawaiian.
6

5

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘(7) NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGE.—The term

2 ‘Native American language’ means a historical, tra3 ditional language spoken by Native Americans.

4 ‘‘(8) NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGE COLLEGE.—

5 The term ‘Native American language college’

6 means—

7 ‘‘(A) a tribally controlled college or univer8 sity (as defined in section 2 of the Tribally Con9 trolled College or University Assistance Act of

10 1978 (25 U.S.C. 1801));

11 ‘‘(B) a college that is applying for, or has

12 obtained, funds under section 109 for a Native

13 American language survival school in a Native

14 American language that—

15 ‘‘(i) the college regularly offers as

16 part of the curriculum of the college; and

17 ‘‘(ii) has the support of an Indian

18 tribal government traditionally affiliated

19 with the Native American language; and

20 ‘‘(C) Ka Haka ‘Ula O Ke’elikolani College.

21 ‘‘(9) NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGE EDU22 CATIONAL ORGANIZATION.—The term ‘Native Amer23 ican language educational organization’ means an

24 organization that—

25 ‘‘(A) is governed by a board consisting—
7

6

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘(i) primarily of Native Americans;

2 and

3 ‘‘(ii) as many speakers of 1 or more

4 Native American languages as practicable;

5 ‘‘(B) is currently providing instruction

6 through the use of a Native American language

7 to at least 10 preschool, elementary school, or

8 secondary school students for at least 700

9 hours per year per student;

10 ‘‘(C) has provided instruction through the

11 use of a Native American language to at least

12 10 preschool, elementary school, or secondary

13 school students for at least 700 hours per year

14 per student for a period of not less than 3 years

15 before the date of application for a grant or

16 contract under this title; and

17 ‘‘(D) may be a public school that meets the

18 requirements of subparagraphs (A), (B), and

19 (C).

20 ‘‘(10) NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGE NEST.—

21 The term ‘Native American language nest’ means a

22 site-based educational program that—

23 ‘‘(A) enrolls families with children under

24 the age of 7;
8

7

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘(B) is conducted through a Native Amer2 ican language for at least 700 hours per year

3 per student; and

4 ‘‘(C) has the specific goal of strengthening,

5 revitalizing, or reestablishing a Native Amer6 ican language and culture as a living language

7 and culture of daily life.

8 ‘‘(11) NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGE SURVIVAL

9 SCHOOL.—The term ‘Native American language sur10 vival school’ means a site-based educational

11 program—

12 ‘‘(A) in which a Native American language

13 is dominant;

14 ‘‘(B) that expands from a Native American

15 language nest, as a separate entity or inclusive

16 of a Native American language nest, to enroll

17 families with children eligible for elementary

18 school or secondary school; and

19 ‘‘(C) that provides a complete education

20 through a Native American language with the

21 specific goal of strengthening, revitalizing, or

22 reestablishing a Native American language and

23 culture as a living language and culture of daily

24 life.
9

8

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘(12) NATIVE AMERICAN PACIFIC ISLANDER.—

2 The term ‘Native American Pacific Islander’ means

3 any descendant of the aboriginal people of any is4 land in the Pacific Ocean that is a territory or pos5 session of the United States.

6 ‘‘(13) NATIVE HAWAIIAN.—The term ‘Native

7 Hawaiian’ has the meaning given the term in section

8 7207 of the Elementary and Secondary Education

9 Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7517).

10 ‘‘(14) SECONDARY SCHOOL.—The term ‘second11 ary school’ has the meaning given the term in sec12 tion 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Edu13 cation Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).

14 ‘‘(15) SECRETARY.—The term ‘Secretary’

15 means the Secretary of Education.

16 ‘‘(16) TRIBAL ORGANIZATION.—The term ‘trib17 al organization’ has the meaning given the term in

18 section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Edu19 cation Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).’’.

20 SEC. 4. NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGE NESTS AND SUR21 VIVAL SCHOOLS.

22 The Native American Languages Act (25 U.S.C.

23 2901 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the follow24 ing:
10

9

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘SEC. 108. NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGE NESTS.

2 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may make grants

3 to, or enter into contracts with, Native American language

4 educational organizations, Native American language col5 leges, Indian tribal governments, organizations that dem6 onstrate the potential to become Native American lan7 guage educational organizations, or consortia of such enti8 ties for the purpose of establishing Native American lan9 guage nests for—

10 ‘‘(1) students under the age of 7; and

11 ‘‘(2) families of the students.

12 ‘‘(b) REQUIREMENTS.—A Native American language

13 nest receiving funds under this section shall—

14 ‘‘(1) provide instruction and child care through

15 the use of a Native American language for at least

16 10 children under the age of 7 for at least 700

17 hours per year per student;

18 ‘‘(2) provide compulsory classes in a Native

19 American language for parents of students enrolled

20 in a Native American language nest (including Na21 tive American language-speaking parents);

22 ‘‘(3) provide compulsory monthly meetings for

23 parents and other family members of students en24 rolled in a Native American language nest;
11

10

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘(4) provide a preference in enrollment for stu2 dents and families who are fluent in a Native Amer3 ican language;

4 ‘‘(5) receive at least 5 percent of the funding

5 for the program from another source, which may in6 clude any federally funded program (such as a Head

7 Start program funded under the Head Start Act (42

8 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.)); and

9 ‘‘(6) ensure that a Native American language

10 becomes the dominant medium of instruction in the

11 Native American language nest not later than 6

12 years after the date on which the Native American

13 language nest first receives funding under this title.

14 ‘‘SEC. 109. NATIVE AMERICAN LANGUAGE SURVIVAL

15 SCHOOLS.

16 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may make grants

17 to, or enter into contracts with, Native American language

18 educational organizations, Native American language col19 leges, Indian tribal governments, or consortia of such enti20 ties, to operate, expand, and increase the number of Na21 tive American language survival schools throughout the

22 United States and the territories of the United States for

23 Native American children and Native American language24 speaking children.
12

11

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘(b) ELIGIBILITY.—As a condition of receiving funds

2 under subsection (a), a Native American language edu3 cational organization, a Native American language college,

4 an Indian tribal government, or a consortium of such

5 entities—

6 ‘‘(1) shall have at least 3 years experience in

7 operating and administering—

8 ‘‘(A) a Native American language survival

9 school;

10 ‘‘(B) a Native American language nest; or

11 ‘‘(C) any other educational program in

12 which instruction is conducted in a Native

13 American language;

14 ‘‘(2) shall include students who are subject to

15 State compulsory education laws; and

16 ‘‘(3) may include—

17 ‘‘(A) students from infancy through grade

18 12; and

19 ‘‘(B) the families of the students.

20 ‘‘(c) PRIORITY.—In making grants or entering into

21 contracts under this section, the Secretary shall give prior22 ity to—

23 ‘‘(1) the provision of direct educational services;

24 ‘‘(2) applicants that have the support of each

25 appropriate tribal government; and
13

12

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘(3) applicants that have researched language

2 revitalization and the unique characteristics and cir3 cumstances of the languages of their schools.

4 ‘‘(d) USE OF FUNDS.—

5 ‘‘(1) REQUIRED USES.—A Native American lan6 guage survival school receiving funds under this

7 section—

8 ‘‘(A) shall consist of not less than 700

9 hours of instruction per student conducted an10 nually through 1 or more Native American lan11 guages for at least 15 students for whom a Na12 tive American language survival school is their

13 principal place of instruction;

14 ‘‘(B) shall provide direct educational serv15 ices and school support services to students,

16 which may include—

17 ‘‘(i) support services for children with

18 special needs;

19 ‘‘(ii) transportation;

20 ‘‘(iii) boarding;

21 ‘‘(iv) food service;

22 ‘‘(v) teacher and staff housing;

23 ‘‘(vi) purchase of basic materials;

24 ‘‘(vii) adaptation of teaching mate25 rials;
14

13

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘(viii) translation and development;

2 and

3 ‘‘(ix) other appropriate services;

4 ‘‘(C)(i) shall provide direct or indirect edu5 cational and support services for the families of

6 enrolled students on site, through colleges, or

7 through other means to increase the families’

8 knowledge and use of the Native American lan9 guage and culture; and

10 ‘‘(ii) may impose a requirement of family

11 participation as a condition of student enroll12 ment; and

13 ‘‘(D) shall ensure that within 3 years of

14 enrollment, all students achieve functional flu15 ency in a Native American language that is ap16 propriate to the unique circumstances and

17 endangerment status of the Native American

18 language, with the ultimate goal of academic or

19 cognitive fluency.

20 ‘‘(2) PERMISSIBLE USES.—A Native American

21 language survival school receiving funds under this

22 section may—

23 ‘‘(A) include Native American language

24 nests and other educational programs for stu25 dents who—
15

14

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘(i) are not Native American lan2 guage speakers; but

3 ‘‘(ii) seek—

4 ‘‘(I) to establish fluency through

5 instruction in a Native American lan6 guage; or

7 ‘‘(II) to reestablish fluency as de8 scendants of Native American lan9 guage speakers;

10 ‘‘(B) provide instruction through more

11 than 1 language;

12 ‘‘(C) provide instruction through a regional

13 program (as opposed to 1 site) to better serve

14 geographically dispersed students;

15 ‘‘(D) include a program of concurrent and

16 summer college or university education course

17 enrollment for secondary school students en18 rolled in the Native American language survival

19 school;

20 ‘‘(E) provide special support for Native

21 American languages for which there are very

22 few or no remaining Native American language

23 speakers;

24 ‘‘(F) develop comprehensive curricula in

25 Native American language instruction and in-
16

15

•S 575 IS

1 struction through Native American languages,

2 including—

3 ‘‘(i) curricula that can be used by

4 public schools for—

5 ‘‘(I) instruction through a Native

6 American language; or

7 ‘‘(II) teaching Native American

8 languages as subjects;

9 ‘‘(ii) community Native American lan10 guage use in communities served by Native

11 American language survival schools; and

12 ‘‘(iii) knowledge of a specific Native

13 American language gained through re14 search for the purpose of directly aiding

15 the development of curriculum materials;

16 ‘‘(G) provide programs in pre-service and

17 in-service teacher training, staff training, per18 sonnel development, upgrading of teacher and

19 staff skills, and community resource develop20 ment training, that shall include a program

21 component that has as the objective of the pro22 gram component increased speaking proficiency

23 in Native American languages for teachers and

24 staff employed in Native American language
17

16

•S 575 IS

1 survival schools and Native American language

2 nests, which may include—

3 ‘‘(i) visits or exchanges among Native

4 American language survival schools and

5 Native American language nests of teach6 ers, staff, students, or families of students;

7 ‘‘(ii) participation in conferences or

8 special nondegree programs focusing on

9 the use of 1 or more Native American lan10 guages for the education of teachers, staff,

11 students, or families of students;

12 ‘‘(iii) subject to paragraph (3), full or

13 partial scholarships and fellowships to col14 leges or universities—

15 ‘‘(I) to provide for the profes16 sional development of faculty and

17 staff;

18 ‘‘(II) to meet requirements for

19 the involvement of the family or the

20 community of Native American lan21 guage survival school students in Na22 tive American language survival

23 schools; and
18

17

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘(III) to develop resource person2 nel for Native American language pro3 grams in public schools;

4 ‘‘(iv) training in the language and cul5 ture associated with a Native American

6 language survival school that is provided

7 by a community or academic expert, in8 cluding credit courses;

9 ‘‘(v) structuring of personnel oper10 ations to support Native American lan11 guage and cultural fluency and program

12 effectiveness;

13 ‘‘(vi) Native American language plan14 ning, documentation, reference material,

15 and archives development; and

16 ‘‘(vii) recruitment for participation in

17 teacher, staff, student, and community de18 velopment; or

19 ‘‘(H) rent, lease, purchase, construct,

20 maintain, or repair educational facilities to en21 sure the academic achievement of Native Amer22 ican language survival school students.

23 ‘‘(3) REQUIREMENTS FOR RECIPIENTS OF FEL24 LOWSHIPS OR SCHOLARSHIPS.—A recipient of a fel25 lowship or scholarship under paragraph (2)(G)(iii)
19

18

•S 575 IS

1 who is enrolled in a program leading to a degree or

2 certificate shall—

3 ‘‘(A) be trained in the Native American

4 language of the Native American language sur5 vival school, if such program is available

6 through that Native American language;

7 ‘‘(B) complete a minimum annual number

8 of hours in Native American language study or

9 training during the period of the fellowship or

10 scholarship; and

11 ‘‘(C) enter into a contract that obligates

12 the recipient to provide the recipient’s profes13 sional services, during the period of the fellow14 ship or scholarship or on completion of a degree

15 or certificate, in Native American language in16 struction in the Native American language as17 sociated with the Native American language

18 survival school in which the service obligation is

19 to be fulfilled.

20 ‘‘SEC. 110. DEMONSTRATION PROGRAMS.

21 ‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary shall make

22 grants, or enter into contracts, to establish 3 demonstra23 tion programs that will provide assistance to Native Amer24 ican language survival schools and Native American lan25 guage nests.
20

19

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘(b) LOCATIONS AND PURPOSES.—The demonstra2 tion programs shall be established at—

3 ‘‘(1) Ka Haka ‘Ula O Ke‘elikolani College of

4 the University of Hawaii at Hilo, in consortium with

5 the ‘Aha Punana Leo, Inc., and with other entities

6 if determined to be appropriate by the College—

7 ‘‘(A) for the conduct of a demonstration

8 program in the development and operation of

9 the various components of a regional Native

10 American language survival school program and

11 college level Native American language teaching

12 and use that is supportive of Native American

13 language survival schools; and

14 ‘‘(B) for the provision of assistance in the

15 establishment, operation, and administration of

16 Native American language nests and Native

17 American language survival schools by such

18 means as—

19 ‘‘(i) training;

20 ‘‘(ii) hosting informational visits to

21 demonstration sites; and

22 ‘‘(iii) providing a national clearing23 house for data and information relevant

24 to—
21

20

•S 575 IS

1 ‘‘(I) teaching Native American

2 languages;

3 ‘‘(II) conducting outreach;

4 ‘‘(III) offering courses;

5 ‘‘(IV) providing conferences; and

6 ‘‘(V) carrying out other activities;

7 ‘‘(2) Piegan Institute of Browning, Montana,

8 for demonstration of the operation of a Native

9 American language nest and Native American lan10 guage survival school; and

11 ‘‘(3) the Alaska Native Language Center of the

12 University of Alaska at Fairbanks, in consortium

13 with other entities as the Center determines to be

14 appropriate, for the conduct of a demonstration pro15 gram, training, outreach, conferences, and visitation

16 programs, and for provision of other assistance, in

17 developing—

18 ‘‘(A) orthographies;

19 ‘‘(B) resource materials;

20 ‘‘(C) language documentation;

21 ‘‘(D) language preservation;

22 ‘‘(E) material archiving; and

23 ‘‘(F) community support development.

24 ‘‘(c) USE OF TECHNOLOGY.—The demonstration pro25 grams established under this section may employ syn-
22

21

•S 575 IS

1 chronic and asynchronic telecommunications and other ap2 propriate means to maintain coordination and cooperation

3 among the programs and with participating Native Amer4 ican language survival schools and Native American lan5 guage nests.

6 ‘‘(d) SITE VISIT EVALUATIONS.—The demonstration

7 programs established under this section shall provide di8 rection to the Secretary in developing a site visit evalua9 tion of Native American language survival schools and Na10 tive American language nests.

11 ‘‘(e) FOLLOWUP AND DATA COLLECTION.—A dem12 onstration program established under this section may

13 conduct followup data collection and analysis on students

14 while the students are in school—

15 ‘‘(1) to assess how Native American language

16 survival school students are performing in compari17 son with other students; and

18 ‘‘(2) to identify instructional methods that are

19 working and instructional methods that are not

20 working.

21 ‘‘(f) ENDOWMENTS AND FACILITIES.—A demonstra22 tion program established under this section may—

23 ‘‘(1) establish endowments to further the activi24 ties of the demonstration program relating to the
23

22

•S 575 IS

1 study and preservation of Native American lan2 guages; and

3 ‘‘(2) use funds to provide for the rental, lease,

4 purchase, construction, maintenance, and repair of

5 facilities.

6 ‘‘SEC. 111. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

7 ‘‘There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out

8 this title such sums as are necessary for each of fiscal

9 years 2004 through 2009.’’.

Æ
24

Senator INOUYE. So with that may I call upon the first panel:

Leanne Hinton, president of the Society for the Study of Indigenous

Languages of the Americas, of Berkeley, California; Christine Sims,

chairwoman, Linguistic Institute for Native Americans and member of Pueblo of Acoma, of New Mexico, who will be accompanied

by Vina Leno of Acoma Pueblo, Carla Herrera, Pueblo de Cochiti;

and Travis Pecos, Pueblo de Cochiti; Mary Eunice Romero, College

of Education, University of Arizona, Tucson; and William

Demmert, Jr., Professor of Education, Woodring College of Education, Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome.

May I first recognize Dr. Leanne Hinton.

STATEMENT OF LEANNE HINTON, PRESIDENT, SOCIETY FOR

THE STUDY OF THE INDIGENOUS LANGUAGES OF THE

AMERICAS, BERKELEY, CA

Ms. HINTON. Thank you very much, Senator Inouye.

I come from California, which is probably the most diverse part

of this diverse country in terms of indigenous languages. Out of

probably 85 to 100 indigenous languages that used to exist in California, one-half of them are gone now, with only documentation

from linguists to recognize their existence; and the other one-half,

about 50 living languages today, the vast majority of them have 5

or fewer speakers, all over 70 years old.

But California, like other parts of the United States and like

other parts of the world, has been going through a strengthening

movement to make sure that their own original identity isn’t lost,

even as they adapt, per force, to the dominant society. Language

is the center of these efforts, and it is wonderful to see that American language policy toward Native Americans has started to move

in the same direction that the Native Americans themselves are

moving in to try to keep their languages alive, to begin to see Native American languages as a resource rather than as a problem.

As you know, for the vast majority of languages all over the

country and, in fact, all over the world, very few people are learning them at home anymore, and so the problem is how to get new

speakers if they are not learning them at home. And it is demonstrably true that the fastest and most effective way to get a critical

mass of new fluent speakers of an endangered language is through

the schools, the same institution that was used to destroy those

very languages in the past. The languages are silent at home and

in the community, and so the only path to fluency at this time is

through language nests and language survival schools, where the

main instruction language is the indigenous language itself.

The Hawaiians and Blackfeet both named in S. 575 have done

an admirable job of developing highly successful language nests

and language survival schools, and have served as models to many

other tribes, and we know through their hard work and leadership

that these systems work successfully to educate students to be literate and fluent in their ancestral language and accustomed to

using it in daily communication, and also are literate and fluent in

English and fully prepared to go on to higher education in Englishspeaking institutions.
25

Other language nests and survival schools have also developed or

are currently being planned around the country, such as those of

the Cochitis and Acomas in New Mexico, the Yuroks in California,

the Ojibwe in Wisconsin, the Washoes in Nevada, the Mohawks in

New York, the Lakotas in South and North Dakota, among others.

ANA funding, granted by Congress through 1992 Native American

Languages Act, has been vital to the development of these programs, and I trust it will last for a very long time.

There are many challenges to developing good survival schools,

but they are surmountable. One of the severest challenges is often

that those who know the language are too old to teach. And at the

same time there are young tribal members who can teach, but don’t

know the language. How can these dedicated tribal members learn

their ancestral tongues? In Hawaii there are universities and colleges where they can learn these things, but in California there is

not.

The Advocates for Indigenous California Language Survival and

the University of California have been trying to develop solutions

to this problem. In particular, the Master-Apprentice Language

Learning Program for languages where professional-aged tribal

members who didn’t learn their language at home can begin to do

so through intense apprenticeship to a speaker, and this model has

been spreading through the country.

I must say that from the vantage point of my home State, very

few of the many tribes of California will be able to benefit from this

bill. They are small tribes to begin with, with only a handful of elderly speakers, and so getting the critical mass of fluent speakers

to even teach the language in the first place is the big challenge

for us. And there is a sentence in 575 that says that small communities whose languages have few or no speakers can be assisted by

language colleges or language survival schools, but this is vague

and indirect, and I have been charged by the California Indians

who I have been speaking to in the last few days to plead for close

attention to the needs of these small groups.

This is a sad time for Native American languages, many of which

are disappearing before our eyes, but it is also a very exciting time

when pioneering experiments in language revitalization are taking

place and we are seeing the wonderful result of a new generation

of children who are fluent in their Native American language and

fully bilingual in English as well, with Hawaii leading the way in

this. Long ago, previous congressional acts devoted enormous efforts to the schools who were charged with the eradication of Native American languages and cultural traditions. Now, in this hopefully wiser time, it behooves this Congress to devote an equivalent

amount of effort to help indigenous people regain the languages

that were erased from their lives, and I thank you for this bill.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Hinton appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Doctor. And you can be

assured that we will do our best to restore the languages, some

long forgotten, but they will be restored.

And now may I call upon Dr. Sims.
26

STATEMENT OF CHRISTINE SIMS, CHAIRWOMAN, LINGUISTIC

INSTITUTE FOR NATIVE AMERICANS AND MEMBER OF

PUEBLO OF ACOMA, NM, ACCOMPANIED BY VINA LENO,

ACOMA PUEBLO; CARLA HERRERA, PUEBLO DE COCHITI;

AND TRAVIS PECOS, PUEBLO DE COCHITI

Ms. SIMS. Senator Inouye, thank you for giving me the opportunity to come and present our testimony.

My name is Christine P. Sims, and I come from the Pueblo of

Acoma, located in Northwestern New Mexico, and today I have

brought with me the director of our Acoma language project, Vina

Leno, who is sitting in the audience. I think she is in the corner

there. And we are also accompanied by two young students from

the Pueblo of Cochiti, they are also sitting in the back, Carla Herrera, Travis Pecos from the Pueblo of Cochiti.

Senator INOUYE. Will you all please be seated at the table.

Ms. SIMS. Senator Inouye, these young students are representing

the Pueblo of Cochiti, their tribe has sent them. They are products

of Cochiti’s long efforts to implement language immersion programs, and they have become speakers again of their native language, and they will be coming back again this summer as participants in the Congressional U.S. Leadership Program. So this is

their first introduction to Washington.

Senator INOUYE. Now they are senators.

Ms. SIMS. Now they are senators.

Senator INOUYE. Let us get into the top real quick.

On behalf of the Pueblo of Acoma, Senator Inouye, and the Linguistic Institute, I appreciate this opportunity to present our support of S. 575, as well as our recommendations to the amendments

proposed in the Native Languages Act. Today, as your committee

reviews this vital and important Act, our hope is that this body will

once more reaffirm its commitment to native people and to the survival of their languages and culture.

As all of us know here in this room, for indigenous people across

this Nation, the significance of issues that are related to language

survival are inextricably entwined with cultural survival. For many

native communities, the continuance of cultural values, traditions,

and belief in governance systems are dependent on this continued

transmission of language. Efforts to maintain and revise native

language and to stem the pace of language shift are being seriously

pursued in many communities throughout Indian country, through

either school-based programs or community-based programs.

Language revitalization efforts in my home State of New Mexico

are being implemented with tribes using community-based approaches, their purpose being to create young generations of speakers, as we see here in Travis and Carla today. The emphasis is on

creating speakers from within these communities, and they are

being taught by parents and traditional leaders and fluent-speaking elders in the community. Some of the efforts have been supported in part by language grants from the Administration for Native Americans.

Among native language communities of the southwest, the phenomenon of language shift is increasingly evident, although it varies from community to community in a State like ours where there

are 21 different tribes and six major languages. Among the Pueblo
27

Indian tribes, language has always functioned as the medium of

spiritual and cultural life among the 19 Pueblo Indian tribes that

speak these languages. The Athabascan language spoken by the

Apache and Navajo people are equally vital to the continuation of

their cultural heritage. Yet, we are all faced with the reality that

language survival is threatened by tremendous socio-economic, educational, and socio-cultural pressures in today’s society.

The uniqueness of Pueblo languages in New Mexico reflects a

history of some of the oldest and longest sustained cultures in this

Nation. These languages have existed, and they still function primarily within a sociocultural and a socioreligious community context. As such, the oral tradition serves as a critical vehicle by

which a community such as mine maintains its internal socio-cultural organization, its oral histories, its knowledge, and its spiritual life ways. As well, the theocratic nature of our traditional governance systems is dependent on speakers who can use the language in all domains.

The implications for language loss, therefore, are especially significant given this context. Moreover, the erosion of these languages threatens the very core of spiritual belief systems that have

been the foundation and the stability of Pueblo societies through

countless generations. The survival of these languages in the 21st

century as oral-based languages is a testimony to the resilience and

the wisdom with which tribal elders and leaders have steadfastly

refused to give up these languages.

As was mentioned earlier, the efforts of Cochiti Pueblo is an example of some of the more positive efforts we are seeing in our

state with regard to language revitalization. Travis and Carla here

represent the hope of their community as young people who will

one day be leaders in their village, fluent in the native language

and capable of passing the language on to yet another future generation. They represent the future of young Native Americans who,

while maintaining a healthy connection to community and family,

are just as capable as any youngster in America in maintaining

parity in academic excellence.

The examples that I have noted today, Cochiti, as well as in the

Pueblos of Acoma, Taos, and others, have not been lost on other

tribes. We have seen many visitors come from within the State as

well as outside to see our immersion programs. They include Ute

Mountain Ute Tribes from Colorado, the San Juan Paiutes, and

others. This informal network of language communities in the

southwest represents a larger need for training and preparing a

cadre of internal tribal expertise. As well, the unique set of considerations for language communities such as Pueblo people, who

must honor the oral nature and traditions of their history, suggests

that a demonstration program situated in the southwest may in

fact be better able to serve their needs. Many tribes in the southwest find that close proximity to other language programs in their

immediate area makes it possible to utilize tribal and limited program resources more efficiently. As well, the informal support that

we draw from working with each other to develop new initiatives

provides an immediate resource of first-hand information that is invaluable to training native speakers.
28

As I mentioned earlier, I chair an organization called the Linguistic Institute for Native Americans. Over our 20-plus year history, we have been able to help in efforts such as those that I have

just previously noted. The staff and training expertise that we provide is drawn mainly from the University of New Mexico’s faculty

who have expertise in native language planning, language teacher

training, language revitalization issues, as well as experience in

working in native language communities.

In conclusion, the parameters within which many Pueblo communities function as tribes whose social structures are deeply rooted

in traditional and oral forms of governance, as I have explained

here, suggest a consideration of a training and demonstration program that we feel should be added into the proposed amendments

to the Native Languages Act. Given our unique circumstances in

the southwest, we hope this committee will entertain a recommendation that a fourth center of training be established that

will serve native people of the southwest, with a particular focus

on the following areas: Development and training programs for fluent speakers that will prepare them for language teaching in the

community; development of administrative leadership that assists

tribes and communities to undertake and sustain long-term language efforts; development of language teaching internships and

mentorships that will help build the internal capacity of tribes to

strengthen and sustain community-based language efforts; development of instructional language materials that will serve the needs

of oral-based language traditions; language policy research that examines the long-term effect of Federal and State economic, social,

and education policies on the survival of indigenous forms of

governances, and the role that language plays in sustaining such

systems; last, facilitating an understanding between tribes and

governmental agencies about language survival issues that allows

for appropriate collaborative measures of intervention and support.

This concludes my testimony, Senator Inouye, and thank you

again for the opportunity to speak today.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Sims appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Dr. Sims.

You may have heard the bells. They are telling me I have 2 minutes left to get to the Senate floor for a vote, so I will be running

out of here. We will stand in recess for just a few minutes, and

when I return, Dr. Romero will testify. And when the panel is completed, I have a few questions to ask.

[Recess.]

Senator INOUYE. The hearing will please come to order.

And now may I recognize Dr. Eunice Romero.

STATEMENT OF MARY EUNICE ROMERO, COLLEGE OF

EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA, TUCSON, AZ

Ms. ROMERO. Honorable Chairman, vice chairman, and committee members, thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and

for your support and commitment to the indigenous nation’s peoples and languages of this country. Today I would like to present

to you some invaluable lessons we have learned in New Mexico and

Arizona in regards to the native languages.
29

As Dr. Sims discussed, the community-based initiatives in New

Mexico are reaching some successes in renewing the ancestral languages. Cochiti, like many other indigenous communities, started

out with no blueprint to guide us in revitalizing our language. Although we had the Hawaiian ’Aha Punana Leo preschool, the

Maori language nest and the California master-apprentice models

to borrow bits and pieces from, we realized in Cochiti that creating

an approach that embraced the intellectual and oral traditions of

our community required something different. Therefore, with the

assistance of the Linguistic Institute for Native Americans, a New

Mexico-based organization that provides technical assistance and

training resources for native speech communities and schools,

Cochiti began its language renewal initiatives, which incorporated

second language acquisition and immersion methods and techniques. Our goal was, and continues to be, the creation of new generations of Cochiti speakers. The two young Keres-speaking

Cochitis here today, Travis Pecos and Carla Herrera, are from the

first cohort of children who began learning Cochiti in 1996.

The community-based language renewal initiatives in New Mexico, although they are reaching some successes, and despite these

advances, communities often do not have the financial or educational resources to effect any change. In this complex process of

language renewal, communities need language teachers, materials,

facilities, training on the teaching approaches and techniques, technical assistance in language program development, implementation, and long-term sustainment, as well as research. Therefore,

while we support all of the proposed amendments, we also propose

the inclusion of additional centers for language renewal for the

southwest indigenous communities. The Linguistic Institute for Native Americans would be an ideal organization for this purpose.

LINA is currently working with the New Mexico Tribal Nations

and the New Mexico State Board of Education in the development

of native language teacher licensure policies and requirements. The

American Indian Language Development Institute, AILDI, is a

summer institute held annually at the University of Arizona. It assists educators and community members in the teaching of indigenous languages in schools and communities. Along with LINA,

AILDI will greatly contribute to the southwest indigenous language

renewal efforts as university-based centers supported and funded

by this legislation.

Underway in other indigenous communities are school-based language renewal efforts such as the Navajo, Yup’ik, Hawaiian immersion education programs. Research and experience in indigenous

communities in this country and around the world have proven

that immersion education provides opportunities for indigenous

children to acquire the necessary native language and cognitive

competencies, while simultaneously developing their English and

academic competencies. This is why these proposed amendments

are crucial. They support practices and learning pedagogy that

have been proven effective in promoting the acquisition of both native and English languages.

Unfortunately, despite these advances in reversing language

shift, standardization and English-only policies are exerting pressure on communities and schools to abandon the teaching of native
30

languages. In our current research at the University of Arizona, my

colleagues, Dr. Teresa McCarty and Ofelia Zepeda, and I are presently in our third year of a national study examining the impact

of native language shift and retention on American Indian students’ acquisition of English and academic content. Our preliminary findings reveal that under the pressure from current State

and Federal educational accountability mandates and high stakes

testing, many native language teachers in schools are abandoning

the teaching of native languages. For instance, one native elementary school teacher, who had once been recognized by her school

and community as an ‘‘expert teacher’’ of the native language, reported that she no longer uses the native language with her students in her classroom because ‘‘We don’t have time to teach the

native language. We have been told to teach the standards.’’ This

potent example reveals that as indigenous communities are focusing on developing and implementing effective approaches and techniques for the renewal of their mother languages, these societal

pressures are hindering their efforts. Clearly, legislative acts such

as the Native Language Act and the proposed amendments are essential to the restoration and perpetuation of this country’s indigenous languages.

Thank you.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Romero appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Dr. Romero.

And now may I recognize Dr. Demmert.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM DEMMERT, JR., PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION, WOODRING COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, WESTERN

WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY, BELLINGHAM, WA

Mr. DEMMERT. Thank you, Senator Inouye, for this opportunity

to testify. I have had the privilege of testifying in earlier versions

of this bill, and welcome the opportunity to come back, in part because of the success that previous legislation has had.

I have had an opportunity to review over 10,000 documents that

focus on the research of American Indians, and I have also looked

at those documents in terms of the influence of language and cultural programs on academic performance of Indian children. And

you have heard some testimony that addresses one of the main reasons, from the native community’s perspective why this is an important piece of legislation. The reason is the support it gives culture and identity. Another very important reason, of course, is

whether or not it influences improved academic performance. And,

of course, there is a third, and that is the influence on cognition

generally.

In the 10,000 documents that I have had an opportunity to review, the research has been divided into three parts: Experimental

studies, quasi-experimental studies, and non-experimental studies.

And out of that 10,000 we were able to identify 193 that were of

high enough quality to give us some insights about the value of the

language and cultural programs in the classroom. I will define each

of these so we have a sense for what I am talking about.

Experimental studies include a research design that employs a

random assignment of subjects to treatment. That is the highest
31

level of research and there are certain standards that must be met

in order to be classified under this particular type.

The second is quasi-experimental studies. This is a research design that involves the assignment of intact groups to treatment

conditions; that means the group already exist. Typically, the unit

of analysis, or N, is not the same as the sampling unit.

The third type is non-experimental studies, which constitutes the

bulk of the research that is available. Generally speaking, they are

what we call causal-comparative or ex post facto designs. This may

describe or explain what exists and sometimes compares them to

other existing groups.

The research generally does not say x causes Y; you need an experimental or quasi-experimental design for that. But what we do

find, and I will cover what we have found, is that this research

helps develops hypotheses that we can use as support concerning

the influences of language and cultural programs to improved academic performance. And I will briefly describe what each of these

are.

Heritage language. Native American children who are taught

using their heritage language will learn that language better than

children who are taught in a dominant second language. Heritage

language speaking children will lose competence in their native

language to some degree when the language of instruction is the

dominant language. That is sort of common sense. Children who

are more proficient in their heritage language will also be more

proficient in the dominant language. I think that is an important

principle to keep in mind. There is some level of proficiency in a

native language that must be achieved and maintained in order to

avoid the subtractive effects of learning a second, dominant language. Last, programs that include locally-based heritage language

and cultural elements will serve to strengthen the home-school relationships. And this connection may be an intervening variable explaining the increased student achievement.

These hypotheses fit very comfortably into three of the theories

that we have been using as part of the literature review. The first

is called cultural compatibility theory; the second is cognitive theory; and the third is a cultural-historical-activity theory, or CHAT.

I won’t go into what each of these mean, but generally speaking it

means that there must be a high level of congruency between the

culture of the school and the culture of the community in order for

students to succeed.

I am also an investigator in a project with the RAND Corporation that is reviewing the research literature, incuding also looking

at NAEP data, National Assessment of Educational Progress data.

David Grissmer is handling the NAEP piece, and he reports that

American Indian students have made gains in reading, mathematics, and geography scores from 1990 to 2000. He also assessed

black and Hispanic students, and their scores in reading and math,

and the longer Native Students stay in school, the closer the gap

between black and Hispanics and American Indian students. In

other words, the black students and Hispanic students start gaining on the Native American students. The exception to these finding is geography, where Native American students do as well as
32

anyone. We don’t know the reason for that, but this is an interesting statistic in its own right and probably worth looking at.

The bulk of the research in the literature, as I mentioned, is nonexperimental, and one of the reasons I was interested in presenting

testimony here is that we really need to take a careful look under

some sort of causal comparative, quasi-experimental, or experimental design that clearly ties improved academic performance to

language and cultural programs because, from the experience I

have had, those programs that incorporate those components in the

educational program are very successful when compared to Native

American students generally across any of the national tests that

take place or any of the programs that are in monolingual schools.

Thank you.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Demmert appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much.

Am I correct to conclude, after listening to this panel, that language and culture have a very positive impact upon academic performance?

Mr. DEMMERT. That is what the research implies that I have

looked at, yes.

Senator INOUYE. Are there any negative aspects of combining

language and culture with studies?

Mr. DEMMERT. None that we were able to find in the 193 documents that we reviewed, or studies that we assessed.

Senator INOUYE. What about the others on the panel? Do you

agree with that?

Ms. HINTON. Certainly do.

Ms. SIMS. I think the ties, and certainly we have got two individuals here that are examples of the positive effects that have come

with study of language and culture, and being able to revive that

and still maintain and, in fact, exceed, probably, academic performance. And I would agree that I don’t see anything in terms of a

negative kind of effect. The positive is what we are seeing quite a

lot of when these programs are implemented and they are implemented in a way that meets not just their native language needs,

but also their other academic needs.

Senator INOUYE. I also gather from your testimony that language

and culture have a strong influence upon cultural identity. Is cultural identity an important factor in the establishment of selfpride? We are always talking about young people not having pride

in themselves.

Ms. SIMS. Very much so. I can’t say otherwise. Without that base

and without that foundation, I don’t know how any child would

succeed other than to have that strong foundation of who they are

and where they come from.

Senator INOUYE. I don’t suppose you are going to let them down,

are you?

Well, with that, I will have to run back again to vote, and so I

thank this panel very much.

And will the second panel be prepared? Jocelyn LaPier, Geneva

Navarro.

Until then, we stand in recess.

[Recess.]

Senator INOUYE. We will now resume our hearing.
33

May I first call upon Dr. Rosita Worl of Sealaska Heritage Institute? Because I have been told that she has an aircraft to catch.

If she doesn’t, she is stuck here for the next millennium.

Dr. Worl.

STATEMENT OF ROSITA WORL, SEALASKA HERITAGE

INSTITUTE, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA SOUTHEAST, JUNEAU, AK

Ms. WORL. Yes; thank you very much, Senator. Thank you for

holding this hearing and also thank you for being accommodating

to my schedule. And also I want to thank your very respected staff

person, Patricia Zell, who is well known throughout Indian country

and very highly regarded.

And if I may, Senator, I would like to introduce other people who

are here from our region. Patrick Anderson, who is on our board

of Sealaska, as well as on our Sealaska Heritage Board. We also

have Jordan Lachler, who is our sociolinguist with Sealaska Heritage institute; Bertha Franulovich from Huna Totem; Lonnie Thomas; Bambi Kraus was here; and we also, of course, like to acknowledge Bill Demmert.

I also want to pay special tribute to the Hawaiians, for it really

was the Hawaiians who stimulated our thinking and our hope in

dreams that restoring the languages of southeast was a possibility.

We were very fortunate in going to Hawaii and visiting the model

programs over there, where we learned a lot and we tried to apply

those teachings. So we are eternally grateful to the Hawaiians for

their support and their teaching, but most of all I think it was

their inspiration.

We have been operating language programs now for 4 years. Our

languages in southeast have been characterized as moribund. And

we didn’t even know what that meant until we went to the dictionary and said it was death-bound. And we could not quite accept

that, so our board of trustees made a determination that language

restoration was going to be our highest priority. So we were trying

to emulate the programs that we saw in Hawaii, and we were to

some degree able to copy some of those programs. However, we

came to find out that we have some differences, and so, as we were

moving along, we began to change and to develop new programs.

Our languages are spoken by probably those who are in their

seventies and eighties and nineties. We only have like 11 Haida

speakers left. We don’t know how many, maybe a couple of

Tsimshian people, and less than probably 500 Tsimshian Tlingit

speakers. But, yet, even with that number, we have a glimmer of

hope, and our faith is even renewed, because during our last commencement at the University of Alaska Southeast, we had one of

our students speak for 45 minutes in Tlingit. He spoke in Tlingit

and also he spoke for 45 minutes in the true tradition of a Tlingit,

but I am going to keep mine to 5 minutes, Senator. So we know

that we can be successful.

Our approach has been to establish partnerships with school districts, with the University of Alaska Southeast, and also with native organizations. We have found funding in various sources, as

well as we have had generous support from Sealaska Corporation,

providing us our basic administrative support for all of our programs. In addition to that, we have been lucky in that we man-
34

aged, even despite our financial situation at Sealaska, during this

last year we were able to award $1 million in scholarships, and

some of that is dedicated to language.

But probably the most significant program that we have was a

demonstration project that we had at the Juneau school district.

And in that program we taught Tlingit language and culture. We

also insisted that we have constant monitoring of our children. And

what we found after three years, that our children were succeeding

academically; that they were doing better than other students in

the same grades in the same school, but not having the benefit of

language and cultural instruction. I attribute it to that instruction,

but the other important aspect is that we had parental involvement. And we had parental involvement because we were teaching

things that those parents saw as critical to survival of native people: to succeed both in the western world as well as in our traditional world.

Perhaps the model program that we have had has been our

Sealaska Kusteeyi Institute, which we hold in collaboration with

the University of Southeast Alaska. And in that program we are

moving toward certificates and degree programs. It is our hope that

we are going to move towards that. But in the meantime what we

are doing is we are teaching speakers how to teach, and then those

teachers go back into our communities, into the multiple programs

that we have in culture camps, preschool programs, we have one

preschool program, and we are seeing success. I just attended a

program in Hoonah where I saw the children speaking Tlingit, and

then they would have to translate for their parents. So we know

that it is achievable, even when we are at this point.

So, respectful Senators, it is with great humbleness that we do

submit a proposal to provide for a demonstration project at the

Sealaska Heritage Institute for the revitalization of critically endangered languages. We think that we offer a model that can be

replicated elsewhere, not only in Alaska, but in the rest of the

country. We are working in partnerships with school districts and

with the university. We are bringing the resources of our State, as

well as the country, together, and in this partnership we think that

we can be successful.

Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much. I will have our staff

work with you on your amendment. I know that you have to catch

a flight, but before you do Senator Murkowski would like to say

hello.

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

And I am sorry that I had to come in in the middle of your testimony, but I am pleased that I was at least able to hear a portion

of it. We recognize the great opportunities that we have within

some of our native corporations, and Sealaska specifically, and I

applaud you for your efforts in keeping the languages alive. And

we recognize that it is a challenge for us in the State. It ought not

to be so. So I appreciate your efforts, and I look forward to working

with you and the chairman on this project.

Ms. WORL. Thank you very much.

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you for traveling all the way back

here.
35

Ms. WORL. Thank you, Senator. And also thank you for your

work in working with Secretary Paige and coming to Alaska.

Senator MURKOWSKI. It was an eye-opening experience for him,

and one that I am sure he will remember for some time. But it was

a great opportunity for him to see, at least with our Yupic languages, how the immersion was working in some of the schools in

western Alaska. So it was a good opportunity for all of us.

Ms. WORL. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. Thank you.

Ms. WORL. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Dr. Worl. We hope you

have a safe trip.

And may I now recognize Rosalyn LaPier. She is accompanied by

Joycelyn DesRosier.

Did I pronounce it correctly?

Ms. DESROSIER. Joycelyn DesRosier.

Senator INOUYE. Ms. LaPier.

STATEMENT OF ROSALYN LAPIER, PIEGAN INSTITUTE/

NIZIPUHWAHSIN SCHOOL, BROWNING, MT, ACCOMPANIED

BY JOYCELYN DESROSIER

Ms. LAPIER. Good afternoon, and thank you for this wonderful

opportunity for us to discuss Piegan Institute and Nizipuhwahsin

Schools. And we also would like to thank you very much for including us in this very important legislation. We feel very humbled and

honored to be included, and we would just like to thank you for

this great honor to be here.

Piegan Institute, as you know, is a grassroots organization from

the Blackfeet Reservation. We were formed by a group of Blackfeet

educators who came together to address the issue of Blackfeet language loss. We still have the same group of founders who still run

our organization and who still form our board of trustees. We are

now approaching being in existence now for almost 20 years as a

native language organization, and approximately about 10 years

ago we decided to open a native language school for children. One

of the things that we learned from a lot of our research that we

had done in native language education, and in our discussions with

a lot of elders, was that if native languages were going to continue,

it was going to have to be the children who continued them.

And we began our school, which is called Nizipuhwahsin, which

means original language or real language in the Blackfeet language, and we have a school for children ages 5 to 13, which is approximately kindergarten through eighth grade. We have worked

very closely with Aha Punana Leo in Hawaii. They were our mentors in organizing our school, and they have worked with us for the

past 10 years in our efforts at our school, and we call them almost

on a weekly basis, it seems like, to discuss all sorts of issues, from

funding to working with public institutions to just the littlest thing,

talking about our cook, you know. We work with them very closely

and they really are our mentors in this effort.

One of the things that we have come here to really encourage the

Senate committee to support is the work of Native American language survival schools. We are a Native American language survival school, we are not a public school; we are separate from the
36

public school system. We are a private, not for profit, and we do

work very closely with the Blackfeet Tribe and the Blackfeet Tribe,

in fact, constantly supports our efforts. We brought with us today

a resolution from the tribe supporting this particular bill. So even

though we are a private, not for profit, we do have a great amount

of support from the tribe and from the community.

One of the reasons that we got started as a separate institution

was that we saw a lot of the efforts that were being made on behalf

of native languages. Our community has tried every effort. We

have Head Start programs; we have got programs in the public

school system; bilingual education; we have high school classes in

the Blackfeet language; we have classes at the community college;

we do culture camps in the summer; we have created computer

programs and multimedia programs.

But the thing that we have discovered in our community is that

the only thing that has created fluent speakers is our survival

school. Although a lot of those efforts create some language retention, they do not create fluent speakers, and that is the bottom line

for our community. Our community wants to create fluent speakers

so they will continue the children, as they grow to be older and as

they become adults, they will continue the language. And culture

camps in the summer, language classes at high school, et cetera,

do not create fluent speakers, and our school does.

That was one of the reasons why we have been working a lot

with elders. We have worked with elders since the beginning of our

institute. And the elders are the ones who really stand behind

what we do and they work with us very closely, and they have really strongly encouraged us to continue what we are doing.

In the past 10 years of us running our school, we have had many

ups and downs, and we have had many times where we have felt

like there may be a point where we are going to have to stop, stop

what we are doing and change to something else, and it was the

elders who have really encouraged our efforts and told us of their

problems that they have had with educational systems and how

they were impacted by many of the educational systems, both parochial and public. And because of their encouragement, we have continued on, and this has been very difficult for us. Funding is always an issue. Because we are a private institution, we are not a

public institution, we search for money every single year. And I

know that there is, for us, anyway, as an institute, there is somewhat of a stereotype that we do have ongoing funding. We do not.

And that is something that we would strongly encourage, not only

our institution, but other institutions, that the whole movement of

survival schools be recognized on a Federal level, but also be funded on a Federal level.

And with that I will complete my testimony.

And I would like to introduce Joycelyn DesRosier. Joycelyn

DesRosier is a teacher at our school, and you met her son 3 years

ago when he came to testify. And she has been recognized by the

State of Montana. We work very closely with the State of Montana’s Office of Public Instruction, and this past year she was recognized by the head of the Office of Public Instruction as being the

first State-certified teacher teaching in a language immersion

school in the State of Montana.
37

[Prepared statement of Ms. LaPier appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Oh, congratulations.

STATEMENT OF JOYCELYN DESROSIER PIEGAN INSTITUTE/

NIZIPUHWAHSIN SCHOOL, BROWNING, MT

Ms. DESROSIER. Thank you. This was an address in my native

language, and I said hello, my relatives. I am very happy to see

you all here today.

This is my son, Jesse DesRosier, who came here 3 years ago to

lobby for the same bill. His Blackfeet name is Ahsinapoyii.

Thank you very much, Senator Inouye, and the rest of the Senators on the committee here today, and the staff members, for allowing me to be invited to speak on this bill.

It was 3 years ago my son came to lobby on this bill, at which

time he came we were burying a very important lady in our community, a holy lady and a very valuable lady to me personally,

Molly Kicking Woman, who taught me a lot of my ways, and still

I can carry that on, but she is no longer with us today. She was

a very holy spiritual leader and a teacher, and she was very inspirational in the school when I started.

My son has been given the greatest opportunity while attending

Nizipuhwahsin, the private immersion school in our town, for

learning our language. He has been one that has just picked it up

very fluently and speedily.

Our language school has connected my family to our ancestors,

as our language is so important to our people and our sacred ways

of life. My son has been given the prestigious honor as being called

upon by spiritual directors to carryout ceremonial ways only because he can speak the language and understand it. He is now 14

years old today, and he is sought out by a lot of people from not

only our community, but other communities that speak our language, which is Canadians, the Canadian border. And they come

and ask him and they praise him highly for learning his language.

He would never have been able to learn our language without attending the immersion school.

I also have another younger son that attends the immersion

school and is learning our language.

I began by bringing my small son there, my youngest son there,

6 years ago to attend school. Being a mother, I could not leave my

child at school alone, so I started volunteering my time. Within 1

year I was given a teacher’s position there, a teacher training position, where I committed to learning my language, and so far it has

been great and a great learning experience, one that I couldn’t obtain at any college or university, as they do not teach my native

language.

I began learning my language and then last year, through the

private sector, we didn’t have any funding, so I returned to college

and finished my degree, because I didn’t have a paid position at the

school to continue out. So my learning for last year was a standstill

because I could not learn the language; every day I wasn’t in an

immersion school setting. But I did practice a lot at home and go

and sweep and clean the floors to pay my children’s tuition.

Yesterday, as well, was a very sad day at my home in the Blackfeet Nation, as we buried a very precious and dear grandfather of
38

mine, someone who taught me and my sons our language and

much of our sacred ways. We will miss him.

Another sad day will be next week when I return home. My 14-

year-old son will graduate from this immersion school, where he

has been protected and so immersed in the language and has become such a leader in my home and in my family. I can only hope

and pray that he will be able to obtain and retain the language.

It is not taught very well in the public school setting, as well as

it is at the private immersion school. In our public school we have

non-fluent speakers teaching our language, and some of them only

know a few words and some of them don’t pronounce them correctly. So they mostly focus on their skills, which may be in crafts,

beading, drumming, singing, dancing, and sometimes stick game.

My children are learning their native Blackfeet language through

Nizipuhwahsin, our private immersion school. What they have

learned and what I have learned has opened up a whole new world

for us, a world many think is gone. My children’s pride and sense

of self-worth is so great that the hard work and effort we all spend

in learning it makes it so worthwhile. They are singled out in our

community and recognized for their ability to speak Blackfeet.

They are looked at as leaders by their peers and with pride by

their elders.

Today I stand before you and ask for your support and thank you

all very much. Without our language, we are just people among

people. Our language keeps us connected to the first people of the

native lands. My language gives me my identity as a Blackfeet

woman. Thank you all.

[Prepared statement of Ms. DesRosier appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much.

And do you wish to submit your resolution for the record?

Ms. DESROSIER. Yes; I do.

Senator INOUYE. Without objection, that resolution will be made

part of the record.

[Referenced document appears in appendix.]

Ms. DESROSIER. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. And I can assure you that we are very serious,

because if I were not serious, I would not be running back and

forth, I can assure you.

Ms. DESROSIER. Thank you very much.

Senator INOUYE. Our next witness is Geneva Navarro, Comanche

Language Instructor of Oklahoma, accompanied by Rita Coosewon,

an instructor in the language, also from Lawton, Oklahoma.

Mrs. Navarro?

STATEMENT OF GENEVA NAVARRO, COMANCHE LANGUAGE

INSTRUCTOR, COMANCHE NATION COLLEGE, LAWTON, OK,

ACCOMPANIED BY RITA COOSEWON, COMANCHE LANGUAGE

INSTRUCTOR

Ms. NAVARRO. [Remarks in native tongue.]

Hello to you and all my friends and relations here. Thank you

for inviting the Comanches.

The beginning of the loss of our language came from forced assimilation of our people and the Manifest Destiny policy, and it is

still trying to be implemented through the English-only policies,
39

which will leave all Native American children behind. We are losing our languages, which was not our fault. We have been trying

everything to keep it from dying. Time is running out, especially

for me.

My name is Geneva Woomavoyah Navarro of the Comanche Nation from Oklahoma. I am 77 years old. Comanche was my first

language. I have been teaching the language since 1990 to all who

are interested. I am presently teaching Comanche at the new Comanche Nation College in Oklahoma. I am here to urge your support for the S. 575 bill to amend the Native American Languages

Act that will provide support of the development of Native American language survival schools to assure the preservation and revitalization of Native American languages.

Today I want to discuss four important points. First, the importance of the development of Native American survival schools and

language nests, which are of great importance. The language nests

will teach the youngest, who will learn it the quickest, retain it the

best, and will continue it to fluency.

The second one is the support for Native American language survival facilities and endowment. Without your support and support

from the society that tried to kill our languages, we will not be able

to undo the damage that may lead to the Native American language deaths. We need places, building for these nests and schools

to nurture them. It takes more than physical work to develop the

schools; it takes financial support that many Native American language programs do not have access to.

The third is to encourage the amendment to S. 575 that would

exempt teachers of Native American languages in public schools

from having to obtain certification from outside their tribe. It is urgent because our speakers are dying fast. There are only a few of

us speakers who are elders that are able to teach.

And the fourth is on No Child Left Behind effects on the native

languages because of its relation to English-only Act, which is a

racist policy that only acknowledges English. It doesn’t take into

account our native languages that are endangered, and will endanger all Native American children. We need an amendment to S. 575

that the English-only Act policy does not overpower native languages, which will respect the fact that these languages helped

save our country in World War I and World War II.

[Remarks in native tongue.]

The translation is: A long time ago we all spoke Comanche. Now

we will all speak Comanche again. From now on we will speak Comanche forever.

Thank you.

And now I will introduce Ms. Coosewon, who is the only Comanche speaker that works in any public school in our area. But she

has to work with a certified teacher above her; she cannot do it by

herself.

Thank you very much.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Navarro appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Before I call upon Mrs. Coosewon, may I thank

you for your very powerful message and may I tell you that you

will be around when we pass this bill. As we would say, you are

a young kid yet. I am two years older than you.
40

Ms. COOSEWON.

Ms. COOSEWON. Thank you all for inviting us here. Thank you,

Mr. Chairman and members of the Senate Committee on Indian

Affairs, for this opportunity to testify regarding this bill. There

were so many things that I had written down here, but the message that Mrs. Navarro has put forth speaks for me in so many

ways, and all of us in this room, and I think that I couldn’t add

too much more to what she has said that my testimony you have

all gotten copies of. But there was a few things I would like to add.

I do work in the public school system, and I have a lot of people

that have encouraged me in the school system that I work in. I

have high school students that I work with, and I also work with

the Comanche College students. But the day that I was getting

ready to leave class, I have a senior that is graduating, and rather

than go over what I was going to in my testimony, he presented

me with a letter and he has asked me, he says, Mrs. Coosewon,

why can’t we not help you? Can we not say something in behalf of

our language? And can I write something and can you take it with

you and let them hear what we have to say about the language?

And so with that, I have that copy. I couldn’t make any copies

other than what he handed me, and if you don’t mind me not saying much more on my testimony, which you have copies, can I just

read his letter for you and let this be a part of my testimony?

Senator INOUYE. It will be.

Ms. COOSEWON. And we will consider Mrs. Navarro’s really very

well put together statement representing what we all have to say.

Senator INOUYE. Yes, ma’am.

Ms. COOSEWON. And I certainly appreciate it. Because I just

turned 71 myself, and I was thinking what a turnaround. I was

raised in a boarding school. I didn’t even know how old I was when

they put me there. My grandparents passed away, and I lived with

them from when I was 2 years old, so I never knew any other language than what we speak. So I had a lot. But it is in my statement, you can read some of it. But I think what a twist for them

to ask me to come and teach this language that they wanted so

hard for me not to know. Our gracious heavenly father continued

to help me remember. I am still me. I am myself. For this special

gift that he gave me, this language that is so precious to me, that

I want to help preserve all these precious languages.

So by that I am going to read this young man’s testimony here.

This was dated May 12, his last day in high school, mind you.

This is my senior that is leaving me. And we all kind of had tears

in our eyes when he handed this to me when I was leaving class.

Dear Senate, I write to you because I am unable to attend this meeting in person.

This Comanche language class has meant a lot to me and the rest of the class. I

have learned to speak a new language and learn and be a part of a different culture.

It has furthered my understanding of America’s complex natives. Without classes

like this, we as Americans will forget where we come from. I am a one-fourth Cherokee and that means I would not be here without a Cherokee man. Learning about

people like me, learning about my ancestors has made me appreciate my culture

more. We have learned to speak many sentences and to hold conversations. We have

learned the history of these people and many of their crafts. To stop these classes

is to stop a culture living on. Please keep this class and others like it going on in

our schools. With this I have only one thing left to say: Soobesu Numunuu

sumuoyetu numu niwunu? etu. Ukitsi nunu tuasu numu niwunu hutui. Ubunitu

tuasu numu niwunu hutui nuu.
41

Ms. Navarro, I am just repeating what she had, but he wrote it

down in his statement, about the language living on and we are

going to speak Comanche forever. And they really stress this in my

class at school.

Tommy Lemons and the Elgin High School Comanche Language

Class.

And with that I would like to thank you all for the gracious hospitality you have shown us here for our stay for the few minutes

that we have been here, the few hours we were lost here, and I

want to thank you so much for your consideration of this bill, and

I look forward to it being passed. Thank you so much.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Coosewon appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. I thank you very much, Mrs. Coosewon. And

will you express the gratitude of this committee to your student?

And his words will be made part of the record.

Ms. COOSEWON. Thank you so much.

Senator INOUYE. And I have just one question for the panel here.

What percentage of your students go on to higher education?

Ms. DESROSIER. Our immersion school goes to the grade 8. Then

after that they return to public school to grade 9 to 12.

Ms. LAPIER. And we have only been in existence now for about

10 years, so we are just beginning to graduate children from the

eighth grade into the public school. So actually the students who

have graduated out of our school have not actually graduated from

high school yet.

Senator INOUYE. Would you say that their performance as students has improved?

Ms. DESROSIER. Oh, yes; their performance. They are all in the

honor society, the highest honors in grade eight that return, nine,

and ten. We have some going off reservation schools, and the principal keeps phoning and asking us what we did to these children.

They are astonished because they are so brilliant.

Senator INOUYE. There must be some magic here.

And, Mrs. Navarro, do you have any dropouts? Because we hear

so much about students dropping out of Indian schools.

Ms. NAVARRO. Definitely. They are dropping out like flies, I always tell the tribe. And we don’t know what to do.

Senator INOUYE. But this will help?

Ms. NAVARRO. I believe it will. They are beginning to know who

they are. We are interesting some younger people, and they seem

eager to want to learn our language, and I am sure it will help.

Senator INOUYE. Well, ladies, I thank you very much. I will have

to go to vote; I just missed one. And we will stand in recess until

1:30, because I think all of you need some nourishment. Thank you.

[Whereupon, at 12:43 p.m., the Committee recessed, to reconvene

at 1:30 p.m., the same day.]

AFTERNOON SESSION

Senator INOUYE. I presume we have all had our nourishment.

Now may I call upon the third panel, consisting of Lawrence D.

Kaplan, director, Alaska Native Language Center, University of

Alaska in Fairbanks; Kalena Silva, director, Ka Haka ’Ula O Ke’

elikolani College, University of Hawai’i at Hilo; and William (Pila)

Wilson, Ka Haka ’Ula O Ke’elikolani College, University of Hawai’i
42

at Hilo, accompanied by Holo Ho’opai; Namaka Rawlins, Director

of the ’Aha Punana Leo; Dr. Mary Hermes, Assistant Professor of

Education, University of Minnesota. Oh, Mr. Keiki Kawaiaea. I am

sorry.

May I first call upon Dr. Kalena Silva.

STATEMENT OF KALENA SILVA, DIRECTOR, KA HAKA ’ULA O

KE’ ELIKOLANI COLLEGE, UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI’I AT HILO,

HILO, HAWAI’I’ ACCOMPANIED BY KEIKI KAWAIAEA, DIRECTOR, KAHUAWAIOLA INDIGENOUS TEACHER EDUCATION

PROGRAM, AND DIRECTOR, HALE KUAMO‘O HAWAIIAN LANGUAGE CENTER, KA HAKA ‘ULA O KE‘ELIKOLANI [HAWAIIAN

COLLEGE]

Mr. SILVA. I ola no au I ku’u kino wailua, I oui mai e ke ali‘i o

Kahiki, Ke ali‘i nana i ‘a‘e ke Kai uli, Kai ‘Ele‘ele, Kai Melemele,

Kai Popolohuamea a Kane, I ka wa i po‘i ai ke Kaiakahinali‘i, Kai

mu, kai lewa, Ho‘opua ke ao ia Lohi‘au, ‘O Lohi‘au, i lono ‘oukou,

Ola e, ola la, ua ola Lohi‘au e, ‘O Lohi‘au ho‘i e!

Thank you very much, Senator Inouye, for this opportunity to

allow us to express our support for S. 575. We are very, very appreciative for this opportunity.

As you know, my name is Kalena Silva. I am director of Ka Haka

’Ula O Ke’elikolani College of Hawaiian Language at the University of Hawai’i at Hilo.

And I began my testimony with a chanted declaration by Lohi’au,

who was the lover of Pele, Hawai’i’s volcano goddess. Pele met

Lohi’au on one of her dream travels to one of our most northerly

islands in the chain, Kaua’i. Living on Hawai’i island some 300

miles south, Pele sends her sister, Hi’iaka, to Kaua’i to bring

Lohi’au back to her. And in this ancient epic, Pele suspects that

her sister Hi’iaka has romantic intentions toward Lohi’au, and

Pele, as was her wont, flew into a fit of rage and jealousy and

killed Lohi’au.

Now, many in Hawai’i know that Lohi’au was killed by Pele, who

was a foreigner according to Hawaiian tradition, coming to Hawai’i

from Kahiki; however, few people know that the epic ends with a

brother of Pele resuscitating and reviving Lohi’au. His wandering

spirit flying hopelessly over a cave on Kaua’i, she snatches it and

gently coaxes it back into the body of Lohi’au until once again he

is alive, almost as if awakened from a deep sleep.

In the last lines of his declaration that I just chanted, Lohi’au

says:

The now silent sea, the sea that floats on the horizon, the floating cloud brings

forth Lohi’au. Yes, it is I, Lohi’au, body trampled by the foreign chiefess. I live once

again!

Like Lohi’au, we native Hawaiians are experiencing a rekindling

of life through the revitalization of our nearly exterminated language. We want to join with other native peoples in similar circumstances throughout the United States so that together we may

all move forward. Although Lohi‘au was killed by Pele, her own

brother, Kamohoali‘i, brought him back to life.

Now, there have been many Pele bills in the political history of

Native American languages, bills that sought to kill our languages.
43

S. 575 is her brother Kamoho-li‘i’s bill, and through it our languages, like Lohi’au, can find new life.

Thank you again, Senator and members of the committee, for

this opportunity to testify in favor of this very important bill that

gives much hope for the linguistic and cultural future of Native Hawaiians and all other Native Americans. Mahalo.

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much for this very beautiful

and moving presentation. I appreciate it very much.

Does Ms. Keiki Kawaiaea wish to say anything?

Ms. KAWAIAEA. Aloha kakou.

Senator INOUYE. Aloha.

Ms. KAWAIAEA. My name is Keiki Kawaiaea. I currently am the

programs director for the Hale Kuamo‘o Hawaiian Language Center, as well as the Kahuawaiola Indigenous Teacher Education Program, and I would like to talk about our work just briefly over the

last 20 years.

Our collective vision spans about 20 years of intensive, intensive

work, and through these years we actually began with just a very

small number of children. Our hands, our heart, and very sincere

intentions to revive our language through our children.

Through the years we have been able to increase our numbers,

beginning in 1983, at around 32 speakers that we knew were native speakers under the age of 18, to currently about 3,000 in the

State. Our work has included the 22 schools we have across the

State; elementary, some of them are intermediate or middle

schools, high schools, we have a few K–12 programs, along with 12

Punana Leo preschools. That, with the other work that we have

been working with the university which I am at, including our lexicon work; all our new vocabulary to be able to teach all the different subject areas through our language; all of the see and eye

support, including curriculum through all the different content

areas of kindergarten through 12th grade; our pre-service; our inservice professional developed training; our very advanced computer technology, which is pretty well known across the United

States, including our own Hawaiian system in the OS–10 system

of the Macintosh computer. We have come a long ways.

What we have learned through all of this experience is that we

know that we can successfully implement programs which address

the full range of academic needs, as well as cultural wellness of our

students, the wholeness in all of them. And we can do this through

our language and through our culture.

One of the biggest challenges, however, has been sustaining a

critical mass. I should say building of our critical mass, as well as

our capacity. It has been an extreme challenge for us, even with

all of this growth. From preschool, we are really moving up all the

way up from a P, preschool, up to a doctoral program in which we

just got approval to proceed with, a P to 20 kind of format. We are

really looking at the whole comprehensive model, but it has taken

extreme planning and dire work among us to build that critical

mass.

And I just want to give one example of what that challenge is,

specifically in teacher education. It is very difficult for us with decreasing numbers of native speakers, proficient speakers and cultural practitioners, as well as new proficiency amongst our new col-
44

lege students that are coming up. We don’t have huge numbers

graduating from fourth level Hawaiian that desire to go on into

teaching, so the numbers of new teachers is a very big challenge

for us in ensuring the high level of oral proficiency, their language

proficiency, their cultural proficiency, as well as the teacher readiness. That is already in itself a big challenge.

Then our very limited amount of resources of our Kupuna that

we have that can work into the classroom. With the No Child Left

Behind, it has become extremely increasingly more difficult, and I

would really like to plant a little seed, if I could, that some thought

be given to a waiver for those of our Kupuna that now need to have

an AA degree but are at an age where their wealth of wisdom is

in their life experience, and that is a value that they bring into the

classroom that we cannot provide from the university level.

The other is some possible provisional exemption or alternative

certification for those that are native speakers that are of younger

generation that we can bring into the educational setting so that

we have a full range of possibilities to increase our critical mass

and help us build our capacity for immersion education.

Mahalo.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Kawaiaea appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much.

And may I now recognize Dr. William Wilson.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM (PILA) WILSON, KA HAKA ’ULA O KE’

ELIKOLANI COLLEGE, UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI’I AT HILO,

HILO, HI, ACCOMPANIED BY HOLO HO’OPAI, STUDENT, KE

KULA ’O NAWAHIOKALANI’OPU’U, HAWAII, UNIVERSITY OF

HAWAI’I AT HILO, HILO, HI

Mr. WILSON. Aloha, Senator. I want to thank you very much for

having us here and all these people from throughout the United

States. You have done a lot for native languages over the years,

and we really appreciate it. And, in fact, some of the things that

you have done in the past I believe that people have mentioned

other programs that have grown because of the 1992 amendments

that you made which allowed for public schools to have the languages and community groups.

This particular bill relates to a new step, which is to be able to

go to school in your language. Hawaiians are fortunate that there

was an example of this that existed in the past; some other tribes

had that, such as the Cherokees, and I know the Choctaws had

that, and others had bits of missionization through their languages.

But this is the first time in the modern history of the United States

that the Government is supporting this idea.

It is very, very important because people generally now, because

the languages have been suppressed for so long, do not realize

what you can do with a language, that you can study math and you

can study science in your own language. Math and science are not

unique to English. In fact, the word ‘‘algebra’’ comes from Arabic

and geometry came from the Greeks, it wasn’t from the English.

So we can study math and science in Hawaiian, but many people

doubted this.

They also doubted that we could have children learning English

if they went to school in Hawaiian. And we go to school in Hawai-
45

ian quite seriously. Totally in Hawaiian from preschool, totally in

Hawaiian all the way through fourth grade. Fifth grade they begin

to study English. Now, these children can already speak English;

they learn it in the community. They even begin reading and writing English on their own because they can read Hawaiian and they

can read big books in Hawaiian. So in fifth grade they begin

English with what is the book about the pig and the spider? Charlotte’s Web. I know because my wife is such a great teacher. So

they do that book and they continue on.

They have English all the way through 12th grade as a language

arts class just as they do in the English school, and they have the

same things that they study. But they also have a Hawaiian language arts class, so they study Hawaiian epics such as Kalena did

a bit of an expert quotation from, they do short Hawaiian stories,

and then in English they so Aesop’s Fables from the Greeks, they

do even Chaucer and Shakespeare in the upper years. But they can

compare that to the Hawaiian tradition. Their viewpoint of those

things is from the Hawaiian viewpoint rather than saying, oh, Hawaiian this is like Shakespeare or Hawaiian this is like Chaucer.

So we are very proud of that. They can do science. So I think it

is important that people realize that if you are going to do this, you

have to be very serious.

And I am going on a little bit, but one thing that I read recently

that really struck home was they have done studies of children who

have been adopted from Korea and Russia at seven, six years of

age, and they have completely forgotten the language. So we need

to continue at least to grade six, seven, eight, at the very least, if

they are going to remember.

So with that I would like to introduce one of our graduates. We

have had about 100 immersion graduates now. No dropouts so far.

Over 80 percent have been accepted to college, and this is one of

them who is going on to Stanford.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Wilson appears in appendix.]

Mr. HO’OPAI. [Remarks in native tongue.]

Greetings, Mr. Chairman and members of the Senate Committee

on Indian Affairs. My name is Hololapaka’ena’enao Kona Ho’opai,

and I am a senior attending Ke Kula ’O Nawahiokalani’opu’u, one

of a few Hawaiian immersion schools or programs in the State of

Hawai’i, and I am very happy and thankful to be here today to testify in favor of this bill.

I began my education in the first grade at six years of age, and

I graduate on the 24th of this month. I can honestly say that if it

was not for this program, I would not have become fluent in my

native tongue, nor would I have gained a great awareness of my

culture and an understanding of who I am, where I am from, where

I fit in my community, and what my roots are.

The education I received is truly unique and innovative. The immersion education provides a holistic learning environment that

not only instills cultural values upon students, but also provides

quality academic courses. I have no doubt in my mind that I have

the ability to succeed in a non-Hawaiian language setting, with my

recent acceptance to Stanford University. I can honestly say and

genuinely say that I, along with other immersion students, not only

in Hawai’i but also outside, can succeed in all settings. The immer-
46

sion program really taught me how to grow up and how to live not

only in that program, but also outside, and how to gain knowledge

not only within, but also outside, and come back and try to use

what knowledge you have gained to improve your home and your

setting.

I would like to thank you for this opportunity to support this bill,

and I would also like to thank all of the people in support of this

bill, because even though we are sitting in different canoes, we are

all on the same stream paddling in unison towards the same direction.

Mahalo nui loa. Thank you very much.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Ho’opai appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much. One of these days I hope

you will take me to a performance of Shakespeare in Hawaiian.

Mr. HO’OPAI. Sure. Sure.

Senator INOUYE. How would you say ‘‘to be or not to be’’?

Mr. HO’OPAI. [Remarks in native tongue.]

Senator INOUYE. That sounds pretty good.

And now may I call upon the director of ’Aha Punana Leo,

Namaka Rawlins.

STATEMENT OF NAMAKA RAWLINS, DIRECTOR, ’AHA PUNANA

LEO, INC., HILO, HI

Ms. RAWLINS. [Remarks in native tongue.]

Thank you, Senator Inouye, and aloha to you, Senator Murkowski. I just met you last night at our shindig over at the reception;

it was very nice. And thank you, Senator and the staff and everyone here that have come to show support for this bill that you introduced again this year, Senators, S. 575. The years that we have

worked together with you, it is just, I guess just awesome and overwhelming that you continue to support us at home and to hear how

everyone just loves you, you know, from all the other States, from

Indian country. It gives us much pride. And to see how you want

to recognize us, the Punana Leo, with our consortium, Ka Haka

Ula O Keelikolani, at the Federal level to honor the work that we

have done all of these years. It has been 20 years. It has been a

beautiful ride, and it is an experience that, you know, we want to

share.

In fact, we have been sharing all of these years with those that

want to come and see our model in Hawaii. A couple of years ago

the Ford Foundation gave us a grant because we needed the

human resource to help us take people around and coordinate and

come and see our Punana Leo babies, then into the kindergarten

classroom, up into the college, and developing curriculum, and

doing everything, you know, spinning all of our plates all at once.

And he [Holo] is in the fifth graduating class. We have had four

other graduating classes that have come through the program, and

it is just wonderful to have our own student from Hilo, from

Nawahiokalani’opu’u, come here today and testify and to verify and

validate the work that we have done all of these years. And we are

more than ready to charge some more with what you propose for

us to do in our consortium as demonstration sites, along with the

Blackfeet and all of the other indigenous peoples that want to, that
47

have the desire to carry this kind of work forward for [remarks in

native language] language survival.

[Remarks in native language.] Aloha.

[Prepared statement of Ms. Rawlins appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Aloha and mahalo.

I am glad our recording secretary understands native languages.

Ms. RAWLINS. Only 13 letters.

Senator MURKOWSKI. You make it sound so simple, so beautiful.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to introduce the next

panelist, and I appreciate the favor that you have accorded me in

welcoming Dr. Lawrence Kaplan, the director for the Alaska Native

Language Center at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks.

Dr. Kaplan, welcome. Thank you for being here.

STATEMENT OF LAWRENCE D. KAPLAN, DIRECTOR, ALASKA

NATIVE LANGUAGE CENTER, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS, FAIRBANKS, AK

Mr. KAPLAN. Thank you, Senator Murkowski, and thank you

both for taking time out of your busy schedules and for inviting us

here to testify on this important bill.

It is an honor for me to sit here with my Hawaiian colleagues,

who have given us so much inspiration in the area of language immersion schools and Hawaiian language programs at all levels, so

I am very happy to be here with them.

Dr. Michael Krauss had hoped to be here today, but his personal

situation has meant that he can’t attend, and so he sends his regrets.

The core of my testimony today will concern the vital need for

documentation of languages and the urgency of this documentation

in the case of languages whose survival is threatened.

The documentation of languages makes an important contribution to human knowledge and is essential to the production of

sound dictionaries, grammars, and educational materials for native

languages. Even the relatively few Native American languages still

spoken by children are endangered. This is the case of Navajo, for

example, our largest language in the United States. Without documentation, this fundamental aspect of a nation’s culture will be

irretrievably lost. If an undocumented language ceases to be spoken, it is condemned to oblivion. The loss of any American language is a loss to all Americans.

Linguists have the expertise to determine what language data

must be recorded in order to enable future revitalization efforts

and in order to make language teaching possible. Languages are

enormously complicated systems. Native languages are very different from European languages, native languages are very different from each other, and there is a great deal of study and research that is needed to backup a sound education program. Experienced linguists are required to understand grammatical systems

accurately and to formulate rules which describe them.

At the Alaska Native Language Center, we feel a scholarly responsibility to find, procure, and account for all previous documentation of native languages. And in the case of Alaska, this goes

back to the year 1732. Concentrating on Alaskan languages, we

strive nevertheless to provide a full perspective on whole language
48

communities and language families, bringing to bear material from

related languages outside of Alaska. For instance, Canadian,

Greenlandic and Siberian Eskimo, or Navajo and Apache in the

case of Athabascan, representing our two major language families

in Alaska.

Resources from related languages must be considered for the information they contain and for the model they provide. These resources are sometimes written in French or Danish or even Russian, and they may be 200 years old, and all of this requires a

scholarly approach. Further, contact among communities of speakers of related languages and dialects, whether this is within the

United States or international, must be encouraged so that language work is cooperative. We cannot afford duplication of effort.

Traditional efforts cannot normally be expected to have access to

far-flung archives or contacts; whereas academics can and should

be in the best position to provide and interpret research results to

the communities.

The staff at the Alaska Native Language Center and Dr. Krauss

have compiled an archive of some 10,000 items documenting the

State’s languages and serving as a model for other States and

groups interested in undertaking their own language documentation so that there is an accessible collection of material. ANLC is

involved in working with communities on conducting their own language documentation by training students and native speakers in

techniques of applied language research. We are experienced in native language work and prepared to assist native groups and communities in learning to meet their own needs for language documentation and collection and archiving of language materials.

A special aspect of the Center involves the strong voice of native

people in Alaska, who are over 15 percent of the State’s population.

They have given the Center an important service orientation which

is not found in the same way in academic linguistics and anthropology departments with their theoretical orientation. We have developed a strong focus on documenting languages and we have hired

expert native personnel and native speakers.

The Alaska Native Language Center is prepared to fulfill the role

of demonstration center specified in S. 575, and we believe we

would work in good complementation with the other two centers.

We would be pleased to be of service to Native American groups

interested in language analysis, documentation, and archiving. We

are also in a position to advise on some of the complex issues that

No Child Left Behind poses for native languages.

That concludes my testimony. Thank you all very much.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Kaplan appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Dr. Kaplan.

And may I now recognize Dr. Mary Hermes.

STATEMENT OF MARY HERMES, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF

EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA, DULUTH, MN, ACCOMPANIED BY LISA LARONGE, OJIBWE LANGUAGE IMMERSION SCHOOL, HAYWARD, WI

Ms. HERMES. Thank you, Senators, for the opportunity to be here

today. The first thing I would like to do is introduce Lisa LaRonge,
49

who is accompanying me today, and she would like to greet us in

Ojibwe.

Ms. LARONGE. [Remarks in native tongue.]

Ms. HERMES. [Remarks in native tongue.]

I am Mary Hermes. I am a professor of education at the University of Minnesota Duluth. I am very happy to be here today, and

honored to sit among people I consider my heroes.

I would like to make three main points. I think the main reason

I am here, actually, is because I am a parent of two children in the

Waadookodaading Ojibwe language immersion school, which has

been started in Hayward, Wisconsin, and running for two years

now. We are at the beginning of a long journey. We are at the beginning of our first hill.

My professional expertise is in educational research and in teacher education. The three points I want to make today are, first of

all, about the need for more language immersion schools in our

area; second, I would like to mention my research, which points to

language immersion as a potential key for Indian education for

academic success; and last I would like to make recommendation

for alternative teacher certification programs for our language immersion teachers.

I have been very fortunate in being invited into this movement

through the research work of two language activists. Through the

work of research conducted through an ANA grant at the Lac

Courte Reservation, Keller Paap and Lisa LaRonge really came to

see clearly the need for an immersion school because our language

resources are so sparse. In 1999 they surveyed the reservation of

about 1500 residents and found only 15 speakers alive, 15 people

whose first language was Ojibwe, all of them above 60 years old.

There is less today, I think there is about 10. The other 13 reservations in the three-State area, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan,

are in similar situations. Some reservations have no speakers they

can identify from their area; some reservations have more. We are

the first immersion school and everyone is talking about it now. It

is a light.

Through the research work that they did, they recognized, Keller

often put it that the resources we have are like a pat of butter, and

we are trying to spread it on a football field. And that is what led

them to go to the Blackfeet school and see what they were doing.

It led me to go to the Hawaiian school, to the Mauris, and study

the immersion model and then start. So we had a pilot and then

we have two years as a charter school in the border town of Hayward, Wisconsin, that borders the reservation, where people said

don’t go to that school, we walked out of that school 20 years ago

to start our own school because that school was so racist, don’t go

there. But this movement is bringing people together. It is powerful, it is healing. It is bringing people across boundaries together,

and that is how we started.

The second point I want to make is about my research in culturebased education. I have been doing that for about 10 years. My

Ph.D. is in curriculum instruction from the University of Wisconsin

Madison. And through researching, I was very interested in the

culture-based movement, and I will just briefly summarize 10 years

of research and say that my question was why doesn’t culture-
50

based curriculum, which is like a mantra for us in Indian education, why hasn’t it produced more academic success. Why do we

still have such very high dropout rates? Why do we still score 30

percentile points below non-native students on all our proficiency

tests?

And what I found in the two–State area was that it has really

grown up as an add-on curriculum: Culture, academics. In the tribal schools, the culture classes are added on. We are forced to have

certified teachers in our tribal schools. The certified teachers, 80

percent of them are non-native. Even in our tribal schools they are

mostly non-native teachers. They come in at a higher pay rate and

a different curriculum than our culture teachers who are native

people from the reservation areas. So you can see there is two competing curriculums in the same schools.

Further, when I talk to students, many of them read this as an

identity choice. So they would read academic success as assimilation. They read that as becoming white if I get good grades. They

read in succeeding in the culture-based curriculum, I am being Indian. So it becomes a choice: be Indian or be smart; be assimilated

or be native. And this work echoes other work by Cygnithia Fordham and John Ogboon from the African–American communities.

They find that students see academic success as tantamount to assimilation.

This concerned me very much, as a person who believes very

deeply in the power of education. As I was doing this research, I

was talking with Lisa about them seeing the need for an immersion school, and I felt like it fell out of the sky. Language is an answer to the problem of bringing the academic and the culture curriculum together. So much research shows us that second language

research has many benefits, metacognitive benefits, academic benefits, and yet you can see the world still through that indigenous

lens so that the affective benefits of identity, intergenerational connectedness, self-esteem are also there as well. Language brings the

two together.

The third point I want to make is about teacher education. As

I mentioned, one of the main reasons I think that the two curriculums have been competing and so differentiated is because of the

strict need for teacher certification. I have been professionally making teachers for 7 years. I believe in it deeply. I think there is so

much to it, so much to be learned. I don’t think, and the Mauris

also advised us this way, we don’t need to just slide our language

teachers through and say, well, you are not certified, but you can

teach. They need to have training, they need to be ready to teach.

It is a license to drive our children.

And yet the two speakers that we have at our school, they are

both in their thirties and they have learned as a second language.

It has taken them 10 years to get to the level of proficiency they

need in order to be able to teach in immersion. We cannot pull

them out of teaching for a 4-year degree program; they need some

kind of alternative certification.

So we support very much the Hawaiian’s effort and their desire

to be a demonstration school. We don’t really know what that

means, but we do know that in our area we need to pull together

the 13 bands. We have already started talking about the need for
51

a curriculum center or an administrative center because our

schools are so small. So we are also interested in that idea.

And I think I will stop there.

[Remarks in native tongue.]

[Prepared statement of Ms. Hermes appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Well, I thank you very much, doctor, but Senator Murkowski and I will have to dash off to vote. So can you stick

around for a while?

Ms. HERMES. Yes.

Senator INOUYE. We will be right back.

[Recess.]

Senator INOUYE. I am sorry to tell you that the voting will continue on until about 8 o’clock tonight, so we are getting a good exercise.

I would like to begin by saying how proud I am to hear all of the

witnesses say that Hawaii has been a model, Punana Leo has been

an icon, a leader. It makes me feel good. It makes me very proud.

In your studies, have you found that culture and language studies help to attack the dropout rate among Native Hawaiian students?

Mr. WILSON. Yes, Senator; in our immersion program now, as

Keiki said, we have about 3,000 kids now, and so far, to my knowledge, there has not been a dropout. We have had children go to

other schools, but we haven’t had any dropout of education.

Senator INOUYE. Not one?

Mr. WILSON. Not that I know of. And we kind of talk about each

other quite a bit, you know, what is happening over there and all

that. So there may have been, but I haven’t heard of any. I know

about those who go to other schools and things, they move. Each

one is very precious to us.

Senator INOUYE. This is the system that has the greatest number

of years of experience in this area, so you may be able to respond

to this. All of the witnesses have been speaking of the positive impact, the favorable side of language immersion. Is there any negative impact of this program that we should address?

Ms. KAWAIAEA. I think I am going to address that from my experience as being an immersion teacher as well as being somebody

that trains teachers up at the university. I think experience in the

long-run has been more positive than negative.

The negative that I could count has to do with attitudes of the

surrounding community, you know, the old attitudes that you must

learn English, that you can succeed better in English. So even

within the children’s own families, grandparents that were native

speakers, that were beaten and scolded for speaking their native

language, those kinds of attitudes seem to continue down the generations, and so we have seen this attitude shift about attitudes toward language, the community in the general that there could be

more success in regular English medium, so how is it possible that

Hawaiian could have a greater success. But the fact is we have between an 80 to 85 percent college acceptance rate, and as Pila said,

we don’t know of any of our students that have dropped out, and

we currently have about 3,000 students in our schools and five

classes that have graduated already. So it is pretty amazing.
52

Senator INOUYE. Now, when you speak of community acceptance,

what community are you speaking of?

Ms. KAWAIAEA. Communities across the State where there are

immersion children attending.

Senator INOUYE. So you are not speaking of the Native Hawaiian

community.

Ms. KAWAIAEA. Yes; many of our schools are within homestead

areas, as well as non-homestead areas.

Senator INOUYE. And the people there are not too keen about

your program?

Ms. KAWAIAEA. I think that is the original, the very first impression that they get because of their historic experience in education

and the failure of their students within the community. So how can

you succeed adding on, this is what they are thinking, adding on,

and perhaps we are not teaching through, we are teaching the language. So the concept of what we are trying to do isn’t quite connecting; that we are in fact not teaching to speak Hawaiian, we are

teaching through Hawaiian. That concept is really still a new concept in the islands.

Mr. WILSON. Could I say something about this? I think what we

need to do is get the word out about our successes, because the language has been considered like Hawaiian language and culture

have been considered a bit of a baggage that holds people back in

the past, and so many people have aloha for the children, they

worry that we are harming the children. And then you get rumors

going around here and there, those children at this school don’t

speak English, they can’t speak English, they are not doing well

academically; it is just the opposite of the truth. So what we have

to also address getting the word out in the community, and this

year Namaka did have some ads during the Merrie Monarch, which

were very good on TV, to let people know of the success.

Ms. RAWLINS. I think the other thing that is going to help with

letting people know is what was discussed in the first panel, about

the kind of research that needs to be done that is going to get that

message out, because in order to change attitudes, it is baggage

and baggage kind of hung on into our Native Hawaiian community,

once we get the word out that you don’t have to give up one to do

the other.

Senator INOUYE. Several witnesses have suggested that the No

Child Left Behind Act has had some negative impact upon language immersion.

Mr. WILSON. For example, on the State of Hawaii in compliance

with No Child Left Behind is giving tests to children throughout

the public schools, and because our immersion programs are connected to the public schools, they are required to have a test at

third grade, and it is a standardized test in English, but our children do not start reading and writing in English until fifth grade,

so it is very difficult to pass a test that you don’t study. I mean,

it is completely unrelated to their studies. And then the rule is that

if you don’t pass for a number of years, that your school will be

closed down. So I know in some of the immersion schools the parents have had a blanket refusal to take the test, but something

needs to be done about that.
53

Ms. RAWLINS. The other thing we need to do, I want to add one

more thing about the No Child Left Behind, and I think it came

up throughout the whole testimony, and we don’t know and maybe

that is something that we can be discussing, is to find a way that

we can utilize the traditional language and culture experts in our

schools, much like the Comanche women had said earlier. We don’t

know, we need to find a way to use them, to be able to use them,

and that not only No Child Left Behind, but any other legislation

that comes up that would hinder the movement of language survival schools or use and promotion of the Native American languages, that it doesn’t hamper the forward momentum, but that

there are roadways that we can make through. And I might not

have the answer right now, but I think with others working we can

come up with something really good.

Senator INOUYE. Senator Murkowski wanted to be here, but she

has many conflicting schedules. But she has asked that I call upon

Dr. Demmert.

The question is does the No Child Left Behind Act present problems for the native language programs.

Mr. DEMMERT. I think that to a large extent Pila and Namaka

have responded to that very well. In the first instance, Pila points

out that when you require testing in English and your students

have been going to school in the native language, you have got a

problem. They should really be tested in the native language. That

doesn’t mean they are not going to learn English or they won’t

catch up and surpass the monolingual students who are going to

school in English at some point. I think the research that I testified

about earlier implies that there is a good chance that bilingual children when properly supported, will do as well or better than monolingual students.

The second piece that Namaka addressed is the importance of

continuing to use the traditional language and cultural experts of

the different communities, who probably have not had an opportunity to go to school, and the need for some kind of waiver to ensure that those skills are utilized. I think that is true in Alaska,

it is true in Hawaii, it is true in any part of the Continental United

States, and I know it is true in the circumpolar north. I do a lot

of work with Greenland, and they, of course, are Inuit Eskimo that

have migrated across from Alaska. I mention to them periodically

that we waved to them as they went by about five or 6,000 years

ago. I also work with the Sammis in the nordic countries, and the

same thing is true there. In both of those international communities the countries have given a high priority for traditional speakers and for the native languages.

Senator INOUYE. I am sorry she was not here to listen to that,

but she wanted that on the record.

Mr. DEMMERT. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. Dr. Kaplan, you suggested that a center be established in Alaska. Where would you envision the center being established?

Mr. KAPLAN. Based in Fairbanks at the University of Alaska

Fairbanks, related to the Alaska Native Language Center. We

would be the demonstration center, and from there we would co-
54

ordinate efforts to provide training to groups in the rest of the

country and have them travel to Fairbanks for—— Senator INOUYE. Not to cause any problem, but is Fairbanks better than Anchorage?

Mr. KAPLAN. Oh, that is just where the Alaska Native Language

Center is located.

Senator INOUYE. Oh, oh.

Mr. KAPLAN. It is better than Anchorage, but that is not the reason.

Senator INOUYE. You should not have said that.

Mr. KAPLAN. Now it is on the record.

Senator INOUYE. Dr. Hermes, you have had some personal experience in this with two of your children in school.

Ms. HERMES. That is right.

Senator INOUYE. Now, as a mother, have you seen improvement?

Ms. HERMES. Improvement? I have seen an awareness and a consciousness and a love of the language that blossom in both of them.

They knew I was coming out here, and I have had a lot of traveling

this spring, and they hate it when I go. They are seven and nine.

They said, mom, you do whatever you have to for our language.

And they will stick with school. They love school because of the

language.

Senator INOUYE. Does it provide better cultural identity and selfpride?

Ms. HERMES. I believe it does because they are able to think and

create in the language; they are not just carrying out activities.

You know, we do all the traditional activities. They are not just

doing the activities, but they can do anything. They can go to St.

Louis, they can study anything and think about it in the language.

Senator INOUYE. Obviously I am not a scientist, I am a politician,

but does this language immersion program do something to exercise the brain cells?

Ms. HERMES. There is research, brain research that shows that

there is cognitive benefits. I used the term and Bill used it before,

metacognitive gains. So when a young child up to, I think, the age

of four or five, they have four lobes of their brain devoted to learning language. They are like a sponge for language. So to engage

them in different languages, in more than one language, creates

connections in their brains that will be there for life, that are not

there if they are only in a monolingual environment.

Senator INOUYE. Well, I can assure the panel that we are going

to do everything to report this measure out of the committee before

the end of July. I thank you all very much.

Believe it or not, this is our last panel. Our last panel, the Director of the Bishop Museum of Honolulu, Dr. William Y. Brown, accompanied by the Director of Program Planning and Development,

Ms. Jennifer Chock; Dr. David Dinwoodie, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico in Albuquerque; the Director of

National Indian Education Association of Alexandria, Mr. John

Cheek, accompanied by Ms. Cindy La Maar, President-Elect, National Indian Education Association.

I expect all of you to wrap it up nicely now.

May I call upon Distinguished Director of the Bishop Museum,

Dr. Brown.
55

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM Y. BROWN, DIRECTOR, BISHOP MUSEUM, HONOLULU, HI, ACCOMPANIED BY JENNIFER CHOCK,

DIRECTOR OF PROGRAM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.

Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I understand your

message. And accompanying me, as was noted, is Jenny Chock.

I would like to thank you and Senator Akaka for sponsoring this

bill. We appreciate the chance to be here and we fully support the

bill and look forward to its passage.

As you know, the Bishop Museum is now 114 years old, established in the memory of Princess Pauahi Bishop by her husband to

honor her and to be the house of the treasures of the Kamehameha

family, and we have over 2 million cultural objects and then many

other things that the Senator is familiar with, some with six legs.

Over 400,000 people come to the Bishop Museum annually, and

over the last 3 years we have had various organizations, the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, the Alaska Native Heritage

Center, the Peabody Essex Museum, the Inupiat Heritage Center,

New Bedford Whaling Museum, for all of which we have programs

for cooperation and joint cultural development.

You know, Mr. Chairman, if I may, I know time is short. I don’t

think I really need to read the rest of the details of my testimony.

Senator INOUYE. Before you proceed, may I assure all witnesses

that your full text of your prepared statement will be made part

of the record.

Mr. BROWN. Let me just, then, summarize relatively brief remarks.

We have an enormous collection of documents and tape recordings and photographs, hundreds of thousands of them that represent much, maybe most, of what is left that is documented of the

language of old Hawai’i, and we have individuals like Pat Namaka

Bacon, she is my Namaka, who began work at the Bishop Museum

in 1939 and works there today, and spends everyday listening to

tapes, many 50 years old, that were recorded of Hawaiians, and

transcribes them in Hawaiian. So we have this enormous capability

and commitment in the Bishop Museum to keeping that language

intact.

We have another program that we are investing in to scan the

old 19th century Hawaiian newspapers. You know, it turns out

there were just a few sources, Malo, Kamakau, John Papa Ii, a few

others, but very few, who lived before the Kapu system fell in 1819

that are published now. Those newspapers have words of many

people that no one has ever read since probably the day they were

published—words of people that lived before the kapu system fell—

people that have that old knowledge.

And then we are very interested in trying to make sure that we

keep all of the nuances alive, the different dialects. So for the

Bishop Museum, this enterprise of language preservation is central

to our purpose, and we thank you for moving forward with this legislation to help on that.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Brown appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. I think this might be an appropriate time to

bring this up. Several months ago Senator Stevens of Alaska and

I were discussing some of the employment problems in the reservations and among native peoples of the United States. He is the
56

chairman, I am the vice chairman of the Defense Appropriations

Committee, and we noted that there are tons of operational manuals used by the U.S. Army, the Navy, et cetera, and we are running

out of space. There is a manual for tires, there is a manual for gas

tanks, there is a manual for rifles, and so we decided that they

should be digitized. And the program has started with the U.S.

Army and it is now being established in several Indian reservations, and in Anahola Kavai, the Hawaiian homesteaders of

Anahola Kavai have just set up a center for digitizing. And I know

that in Alaska and in many other places there is great potential

and capacity to conduct digitization work.

I suppose you would not mind if we have Indian country and

Alaskan natives and Hawaiian natives participate in digitizing

your documents? Any opposition to that?

Mr. BROWN. No, Mr. Chairman.

Senator INOUYE. You are for it, Dr. Hermes?

Ms. HERMES. Yes.

Senator INOUYE. Well, with your smile, I cannot say no.

So I thought the Bishop Museum might be a logical place in

Polynesia for that purpose.

Mr. BROWN. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator INOUYE. You must have tons of things to be digitized.

Mr. BROWN. We have literally tons of things that need to be digitalized. And I think you have touched on what may be the top priority for museums now, because, when you think about it, what is

a higher purpose than to protect and provide access to that history?

And the only way to provide access effectively to the public now is

to digitalize it and put it on the Internet. And I would add that,

you know, all of the great institutions of the world that date back

many centuries have at some point been destroyed. And I hope this

never happens to the Bishop Museum, but it happened to the Library of Alexandria, it happened to the Library at Pergamon. So

we need to do two things: Protect what we have, but try to make

sure that that information is out there in another way for all the

world to have, we hope, forever.

Senator INOUYE. You have just given the marching orders to Dr.

Zell here. Right?

Ms. Chock, do you have anything to add to us?

Ms. Chock used to be on my staff.

Ms. CHOCK. Thank you very much, Senator. It is a tremendous

honor to be on the other side of the table. And I just want to thank

you because you have been such a crusader on behalf of not only

Native Hawaiians, but for native people generally. And you just

have this ability, I am sure partly because of your great staff, to

understand all the different ways that language, culture is all

interconnected to how we understand ourselves. And that kind of

guidance, that kind of leadership has just been tremendous, and we

cannot begin to thank you enough for your continued support for

this. And anything that we can do at the Bishop Museum to help

with the passage of this bill, please do not hesitate to call upon us.

Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. See, if you were on my staff, you would get a

pay raise.

Dr. Brown, you heard that, did you not?
57

Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir.

Senator INOUYE. And now may I call upon Dr. David Dinwoodie

of the Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico.

Doctor.

STATEMENT OF DAVID DINWOODIE, DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO, ALBUQUERQUE, NM

Mr. DINWOODIE. Greetings. It is a distinct honor to have the opportunity to testify and contribute to this discussion.

My professional interest is in language use among Native Americans and First Nations people of Canada. Presently, I am participating in an effort initiated by the leadership of the Nizipuhwahsin

school and Piegan Institute to begin a second phase in their work,

and it is a distinct pleasure to be involved in that work. And it is

on the basis of that work and my previous experience that I have

been asked to testify.

In summarizing my testimony, it is my experience that what Dr.

Sims earlier described as community-based efforts are underway in

virtually all Native American communities, that is, communitybased efforts to support indigenous languages and also to address

the linguistic situation more generally. There are efforts to increase

proficiency in English, and in many cases those are compatible,

very much compatible with efforts to preserve indigenous languages.

And it is my belief that these movements should be taken very

seriously. The leaders of these movements, some of which are very

small and consist of families, are in the best position to resolve

some of the difficulties in supporting these languages, and we

heard a little bit about that in the last panel. It is my belief that

anthropologists in particular are not able to sort out those difficulties. In other words, we are in a position to learn from what is

going on in these communities, but the people, the community

members themselves are in the best position to organize and implement these programs. And I think that the Piegan Institute serves

as a model. In my view, it is exactly the way it presents itself, it

is a grassroots movement and should be taken very seriously.

That is the gist of what I have to contribute.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Dinwoodie appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. What you are saying has been said in different

ways by other witnesses, that in order to succeed, an important factor is community involvement or support. Now, how do we achieve

that? How would you suggest? What do we do?

Mr. DINWOODIE. Well, I think the simplest way in the case that

I know best here, which is the Piegan Institute, is to support the

leaders of that institution. In other words, they have already addressed many of these extraordinarily complex issues, and they are

in a position to really proceed and do great things. And I think that

is true of the other programs, it is just that I am not an expert in

the other programs. But I think the key is to move beyond generic

participation toward leadership and support that puts them in a

position to implement these programs.

Senator INOUYE. I will let you in on a little secret here. This

Committee was all prepared to report this bill out immediately, be-
58

cause we believe in this measure; however, we felt that our Nation

should be made aware of why we are doing this, that native language immersion and instruction conducted in native languages do

cut down on dropout rates, it does involve improvement and performance, scholastic performance, all the things that we have been

seeking. It somehow instills better discipline among the students;

it brings about better cultural identity and pride. And so that is

why we are having this hearing. And I am glad that all of you have

assisted us in this.

And now may I have the wrap-up witness, Dr. Cheek.

STATEMENT OF JOHN CHEEK, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INDIAN

EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, ALEXANDRIA, VA

Mr. CHEEK. Good afternoon, Mr. Senator. It is good to be here.

Again, my name is John Cheek. I am executive director of the

National Indian Education Association. Our president-elect, Cindy

La Maar, had to catch a flight, so I am just going solo on this part

of it. I think it is very appropriate that you saved the longest testimony for the end of the hearing today, so I appreciate that.

During various periods in the history of this country, there have

been efforts to eliminate native languages. Rarely has the use of

these languages been supported or even encouraged by the Federal

Government. Since native languages are closely related to the cultural identity of tribal groups that speak them, the failure to support retention of these languages also means a lack of support for

the cultural identity of numerous indigenous populations. The illconceived efforts to eliminate the language and culture of all of

America’s indigenous populations is one of the darkest periods in

this Nation’s history.

Native languages are one of the treasures of this country’s heritage, as well as the treasures of tribal groups themselves. During

World War II, several Indian nations utilized their native language

to help America win the war. Even as World War II came to an

end, Indian languages here at home were under attack in the Indian schools as termination advocates sought to remove language

and culture from Indian students. Recently, proponents of the

English-only movement have sought to mainstream the English

language in America, even though today’s minorities will become

tomorrow’s majority.

To American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians,

our languages are synonymous with cultural identity. Without language, there is no effective way to communicate and pass on the

values and teachings from one generation to the next. Sadly, many

tribal groups have already lost their languages. In 1992, when the

Native Languages Act was first considered by Congress, only 150

Indian languages were still being used, out of an estimated several

hundred.

Today I am speaking on behalf of the advocates of the survival

school movement and amendments to the Native American Languages Act. The amendments would include the addition of survival schools, and I won’t really go into that since we have had adequate testimony on that and it is in my record. But, in short, S.

575 is a modest step in the process of supporting the revitalization

of native languages in America. It would put existing language im-
59

mersion programs on firmer financial footing and provide some encouragement for others to begin. It plans a seed that hopefully can

grow into a larger effort to slow down and perhaps, in some cases,

reverse the march toward the loss of the American Indian language

and culture. Specifically, the bill would support the development of

survival schools and language nests, which NIA fully supports and

endorses.

We did have a couple of comments that we wanted to at least

bring to your attention, and I won’t read them all, but they are in

my written statement.

The certification issue definitely needs to be dealt with. One of

the problems is that the No Child Left Behind Act is totally

achievement driven and doesn’t really consider any other language

validity, I think, and reliability, so we need to make sure that

somehow whatever language programs are created and the money

that is there for them also includes some way to certify those programs so that they at least will maintain some sort of status under

No Child Left Behind.

The act also didn’t recommend an authorization amount, even

though I believe the previous survival school bill that didn’t make

it through recommended about $8 million, I believe. I think our

recommendation is to provide about $8 million for existing programs and to create new programs in order to keep the momentum

going that we have seen here today. I would also want to include an additional $1 million for research

to back up what we know is happening in these local schools and

in these survival schools. Without research, you can’t really back

up and support the work that is going on that is actually working

for Indian communities, so we need to have that in with it.

I believe there is one provision that it looked like they had omitted Alaska Natives, it was under section 103. So if it needed a technical amendment or not, I would make sure that Alaska Natives

are included in that section.

The rest of my comments I will just include in my record.

In closing, I would like to thank the Committee on Indian Affairs

for its unwavering support for the concerns of all native people and

for holding today’s hearing on S. 575. Tribal languages, as with

tribal sovereignty, can only be maintained when committed native

peoples work in concert with the Congress to ensure their existence. To this end, we ask the committee to recommend support for

this legislation and its potential impact on the future of Indian

generations.

I would be happy to answer any questions the committee may

have.

[Prepared statement of Mr. Cheek appears in appendix.]

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Mr. Cheek.

I am very pleased that we did have this hearing for another reason, a very important one, because many witnesses suggested that

this measure, like most legislative measures, has some imperfections and that we should amend it to address the problems associated with the provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act, for example. And, therefore, may I suggest that all of you who have interest

in suggesting amendments to this bill assemble in room 836 of the

Hart Office Building, which is two buildings down. That is one of
60

the offices of the Committee on Indian Affairs. So if you will meet

with the staff of the committee and discuss the changes that you

would like to suggest to the bill, amendments to the bill, I would

personally appreciate that.

So, with that, I thank all of you and I thank Dr. Navarro for the

books. Thank you very much. And Dr. Hinton.

One of these days I am going to learn the language. I do speak

Navajo.

So, with that, thank you all very much. It has been very helpful.

And I can assure you that this measure will be reported out with

your changes by the end of July. Thank you very much.

[Whereupon, at 3:25 p.m., the committee was adjourned, to reconvene at the call of the Chair.]
(61)

APPENDIX

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE, U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII,

CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

The Senate Committee on Indian Affairs meets this morning to receive testimony

on S. 575, a bill to amend the Native American Languages Act to provide authority

for the establishment of Native American Language Survival Schools and Native

American Language Nests and for other purposes.

Historians and linguists estimate that there were between 1,000 and 2,000 distinct Native languages at the time that Europeans first set foot on this continent.

Since that time, there have been many influences brought to bear on Native people and their cultures, and few of them have been positive as they affect the preservation and ongoing vitality of Native languages For instance, there was a time in

our history when Federal policy strongly encouraged the assimilation of Indian people. In carrying out this policy, Indian children were taken from their homes and

forced to attend boarding schools, where against most Native religious beliefs, the

children’s hair was cut, and they were forbidden from speaking in their Native languages, or practicing any aspect of their traditions and culture, including dancing,

singing, and ceremonial rites.

In contemporary times, we have seen the effects of the ‘‘English-only’’ movement

on the speaking of other languages in this country—and on school curricula which

at one time placed a premium on the learning of other languages by American students.

In my home State of Hawaii, fortunately we have a different set of circumstances.

The Native Hawaiian language is recognized as one of two official languages of

the State.

Native Hawaiian language immersion programs are part of the public school curriculum, and private schools using the Native Hawaiian language as the exclusive

language in which instruction in all academic subjects is carried out have more applicants than they can accommodate.

In Hawaii, we have not only kindergarten through twelfth grade Native Hawaiian

language instructed curriculum in the private schools administered by Aha Punana

Leo, we have a masters’ degree program at the University of Hawaii at Hilo where

teachers are trained to provide instruction in the Native Hawaiian language.

Many of our streets bear the names of Native Hawaiian leaders or are simply Native Hawaiian words, and ancient and traditional practices, such as hula,

ho’o’ponopono, and lomi lomi are not only widely accepted but enthusiastically embraced.

Native Hawaiian traditional healers play an integral role in the provision of

health care to Native Hawaiian patients.

So in Hawaii, while there was a time when the influence of the missionaries and

their efforts to discourage the Native Hawaiian people from expressing their culture

and their traditions and from speaking their language, we are no longer fighting

those influences.
62

But there is a new threat to Native languages and I don’t suppose that any of

our well-intentioned legislators would have predicted this—but the requirements of

the No Child Left Behind Act are having a significant effect on the inclusion of Native languages in school curricula, on teacher certification, and in many other areas

that we will hear about today.

Some have suggested that the only solution is to take Native languages out of the

public schools and to provide Native language instruction in another venue.

There are a number of programs already operating in this manner, and they have

demonstrated that students can not only become proficient in their Native language,

but that their academic performance is improved.

Other scientific tests of human brain development instruct us that when children

become proficient in more than one language, they actually generate more brain

cells and their life-long capacity for learning is enhanced.

But we also know that there are only about 155 Native languages remaining and

that 87 percent of these languages have been classified as either deteriorating or

nearing extinction.

Native languages are losing their vitality as those who speak the Native language

pass on, and with the loss of language comes the loss of the means to convey the

history, the culture, the traditions that are unique to each group of people.

We are speaking of the very survival of Native languages, and we must do our

part to assure that they do survive.

(We are told that Senator Murkowski will be at the hearing—so you may want

to call on her next).

Before we begin the hearing today, I want to advise the witnesses that your full

statements will be made part of the hearing record, and the committee would appreciate it if you would summarize your thoughts so that there will be sufficient time

for all of the presentations.

Because of other meetings that will be taking place in the Senate, we have to

complete this hearing before noon today, so I would ask all of the witnesses if they

will please respect the Committee’s desire that all witnesses have time to make

their presentations before the hearing must be adjourned, by keeping their statements within the 5-minute timeframe that has been designated. Thank you.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA

Mr. Chairman. The preservation of our Native languages was very important to

my father, former Senator Frank Murkowski, who joined with Senator Inouye and

others in this room to craft the early Native American language legislation in the

early 1990’s.

Senator Frank Murkowski was particularly supportive of the work of Dr. Michael

Krauss and his colleagues at the Alaska Native Language Center at the University

of Alaska Fairbanks. He would be very pleased to know that S. 575 designates the

center as a demonstration site, in recognition of its pioneering work in language

preservation, as I am.

But the challenges facing those who educate in Native languages are perhaps

greater today than they ever have been. Although the United States has long abandoned the practice of terminating Native languages by discouraging educators from

teaching in any language other than English, the recent ‘‘No Child Left Behind’’ legislation poses particular challenges to the advancement of Native language education. The written testimony submitted today suggests that these challenges will

be felt throughout Indian America.

For months, school districts throughout rural Alaska have been working with the

Department of Education in hopes of finding some flexibility to assure that ‘‘No

Child Left Behind’’ does not undo all of the good work that the Native language survival community has done for more than one-quarter century. I need to point out

that while the Native American Languages Act dates back to the early 1990’s, the

Alaska Native Language Center was established by state legislation in 1972.

I was proud to host Education Secretary Rod Paige’s recent visit to Alaska, so

that he and his senior staff could have a first hand view of all the good learning

that is occurring in our rural school districts and why the implementation of ‘‘No

Child Left Behind’’ must be accommodated to our special circumstances.

While we opened the Secretary’s eyes to how education works in rural Alaska,

there is much left to be done in reconciling Native language education with ‘‘No

Child Left Behind.’’ Mr. Chairman, you have brought together many of the brightest

minds in Native language survival for this hearing. I will be most interested in

hearing how we can continue our progress in Native language education, without

compromising the essential objective of ‘‘No Child Left Behind,’’ which is that every
63

child must be educated in away that he or she can effectively participate in the

American economy. I would like our witnesses, and their colleagues, to carefully

consider how their talents can be brought to bear in resolving this dilemma.

I am encouraged by the written testimony which indicates that intensive education in Native languages does not inhibit educational achievement, but enhances

it, and I would ask the witnesses to help us fully understand this point during the

course of this hearing or in the supplemental information they might submit for the

record. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for convening this important hearing. It could not

have come at a more critical time.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOYCELYN DAVIS-DESROSIER, TEACHER, NIZIPUHWAHSIN,

SCHOOL, PIEGAN INSTITUTE BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION, BROWNING, MT

Thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of S. 575, the ‘‘Native American

Languages Act Amendments Act of 2003.’’ Today I would like to tell you how important Native American language survival schools are for educating our Native children.

Three years ago my son Ahsinapoyii (Jesse DesRosier), along with Darrell Kipp

the Executive Director of Piegan Institute and fellow student Terrance Guardipee

came to testified on behalf of this bill. (Here is their picture with Senator Inouye)

I am here today on behalf of my son and on behalf of all the children at

Nizipuhwahsin to tell you how important Native American language survival

schools are at developing fluent speakers, returning status to Native languages and

at educating our children. Nizipuhwahsin is a K–8 school on the Blackfeet Indian

reservation where core academic subjects are taught in the Blackfeet language.

When I first enrolled my two boys at Nizipuhwahsin a lot of people told me not

to send them there, even my own family. They said that my boys would never learn

to read and write English, that my boys would have lower academic achievement

and would never make the transition to public school and that the Blackfeet language the children were learning was ‘‘incorrect.’’ At times even I began to question,

am I making the right decision for my children?

I was born and raised on the Blackfeet reservation and I have lived here all of

my life. Growing up the Blackfeet language was spoken in our house but we were

never encouraged to speak the language. As I grew up I took classes in high school

and I took all the Blackfeet language classes at the community college but I never

learned more than one word a week. It was not until my sons started school at

Nizipuhwahsin that my family returned to speaking the Blackfeet language.

I began volunteering at Nizipuhwahsin 5 years ago and then entered a 3-year Kellogg Foundation funded Blackfeet language teacher training program at Piegan Institute. I completed the 3-year program and a B.A. in Elementary Education. I became a state certified teacher and for the past year I have worked full-time as a

teacher at Nizipuhwahsin.

As a teacher I see the value of Native American language survival schools not

only for my children but for all the children and for the community as a whole.

When children begin to learn the language the first thing they do is to go visit their

grandparents—and speak to them in Blackfeet. The children visit with each other

at the grocery store and people in the community listen. What was once thought

of as taboo or old fashioned has become a symbol of high status. Elders seek out

children from Nizipuhwahsin to visit with because they know they can have a conversation with each other. It is bringing about a healing between the generations.

Unlike educators and academics the elders do not argue about whether or not the

children speak the ‘‘correct’’ type of Blackfeet. The elders acknowledge the children’s

abilities. The elders reflect on their experiences, mostly when they were young and

with their parents. The elders share the socializing of long visits, singing, and dancing. The Blackfeet language is the bond because everyone spoke only the language

in the old days. Elders today face and experience the most change of any generation

of people. The fast pace of living has caught up to the Blackfeet and the elders are

worried about it. The spirituality in the families and community used to be strong.

Nizipuhwahsin has an open door policy and elders are welcome at all times of the

day. When Nizipuhwahsin school was first designed and built, it was built with a

grandmother’s house in mind. The classrooms were designed to be open, airy and

welcoming. The kitchen is always open for the children and visitors. Our school is

accessible to all the community. Our school has evolved from being not only a school

but the center of community life. Many community cultural events are held at the

Nizipuhwahsin because it is made comfortable and people want to hear and speak

the language.
64

But most of all I am happy for the children who are thriving in a safe, nurturing

environment and learning their language. Many children who go to Nizipuhwahsin

have gone on to public school and they move directly into taking honors classes in

high school, becoming members of the National Honor Society and scoring above average on the ITBS. Learning academic subjects in the Blackfeet language has not

diminished their academic ability but enhanced it.

Pitohkiiyo (Michael John DesRosier) is now completing his 6th year and

Ahsinapoyii (Jesse DesRosier) is completing his 4th year at Nizipuhwahsin and they

are speakers of the Blackfeet language. Elders now come to my sons and ask them

to lead prayers at our religious ceremonies. The elders hold this knowledge sacred.

This knowledge can only be obtained through the Blackfoot language. Ceremonial

rites and rituals have been handed down by Creator since the beginning of time and

must continue to remain so. The time is coming when many ceremonial rites need

to be transferred to younger people. Therefore, the need for reviving the teachings

through the Blackfoot language is urgent. Ceremonies must continue on to provide

protection to the people. My sons are beginning to participate in the ancient ceremonial ways of our people. My sons now have opportunities that they never would have

had without our Native American language survival school.

Did I make the right decision? Yes, our lives have been forever changed by

Nizipuhwahsin.
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165

Æ