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) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

68–388 PDF 2012

S. HRG. 112–328

S. 1262, THE NATIVE CULTURE, LANGUAGE, AND

ACCESS FOR SUCCESS IN SCHOOLS ACT—

NATIVE CLASS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

JUNE 30, 2011

Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii, Chairman 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, Vice Chairman 

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii 

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

JON TESTER, Montana 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska 

LORETTA A. TUELL, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

DAVID A. MULLON JR., Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on June 30, 2011 ............................................................................... 1

Statement of Senator Akaka ................................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Barrasso ............................................................................... 2

Statement of Senator Murkowski ........................................................................... 15

Statement of Senator Tester ................................................................................... 2

WITNESSES

Bowers, Amy, Staff Attorney, Native American Rights Fund ............................. 28

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 29

Brave Eagle, Dana, Director, Oglala Sioux Tribal Education Department, 

Pine Ridge Indian Reservation ........................................................................... 35

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

Cromwell, Hon. Cedric, Chairman, Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe; Board of 

Directors, United South and Eastern Tribes ..................................................... 18

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 20

Imotichey, Jessica, Senior Policy Analyst, Chickasaw Nation ............................. 38

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 40

Mendoza, William, Acting Director, White House Initiative on Tribal Colleges 

and Universities, U.S. Department of Education .............................................. 4

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 6

Moore, Keith, Director, Bureau of Indian Education, U.S. Department of 

the Interior ........................................................................................................... 9

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

Russell, Scott, Rocky Mountain Area Vice President, National Congress of 

American Indians; Secretary, Crow Nation ....................................................... 24

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 26

APPENDIX

Calica, Charles R., Secretary-Treasurer/CEO, Confederated Tribes of the 

Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon, prepared statement ............................. 46

Kippen, Colin, Executive Director, National Indian Education Association, 

prepared statement .............................................................................................. 45

Pigsley, Hon. Delores, Tribal Chairman, Conferated Tribes of Siletz Indians, 

prepared statement .............................................................................................. 52

Response to written questions submitted to Amy Bowers by: 

Hon. Daniel K. Akaka ...................................................................................... 54

Hon. John Barrasso .......................................................................................... 56

Response to written questions submitted to William Mendoza by: 

Hon. Daniel K. Akaka ...................................................................................... 58

Hon. John Barrasso .......................................................................................... 60

Hon. John Cantwell .......................................................................................... 63

Hon. Kent Conrad ............................................................................................. 65

Stewart, Leo, Interim Chairman, Board of Trustees, Conferated Tribes of 

the Umatilla Indian Reservation, letter of support ........................................... 54

(1)

S. 1262, THE NATIVE CULTURE, LANGUAGE, 

AND ACCESS FOR SUCCESS IN SCHOOLS 

ACT—NATIVE CLASS 

THURSDAY, JUNE 30, 2011

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:40 p.m. in room 

628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,

Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA,

U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII 

The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will come to order. 

Thank you very much for being patient. We are expecting a second vote but I thought I would come back and start this hearing. 

Aloha and welcome to the Committee’s legislative hearing on the 

Native Culture, Language, and Access for Success in Schools Act. 

We call it the Native CLASS Act. 

As a former educator, this issue is very dear to my heart. The 

decisions we make today to improve the education system for our 

young Native people are decisions about how we envision the future of our communities. That vision of our future must be grounded in our language, tradition and culture. These three, language, 

tradition and culture, form our roots and to cut those roots is to 

harm the Native peoples. 

Education is what keeps our roots alive and it is the way that 

we honor the knowledge and wisdom of our ancestors. Native 

young people face steep challenges in attaining a quality education. 

Three major reports by the Federal Government on Native education since 1928 have demonstrated little, if any, improvement in 

the education people in the past 80 years. In the States with the 

highest Native populations, the graduation rates are below 50 percent and are the lowest of any other racial or ethnic group. This 

is unacceptable, especially because our Federal Government has a 

unique trust obligation to provide a quality education to its Native 

people. 

The Native CLASS bill presents a new comprehensive vision of 

Native education, one that is grounded in culture, language and 

local community control. The bill provides opportunities for tribes 

to be partners in their own education systems. It paves the way for 

innovative language and culture-based instruction programs. It 

2

also provides much stronger accountability of State and local agencies to Native communities for the administration of their children’s education. 

The provisions of the Native CLASS Act are the result of consultation and input with a wide range of American Indian, Alaska 

Native and Native Hawaiian stakeholders. We will continue to 

work with those Native stakeholders to improve this bill to ensure 

that it meets the unique needs of all our Native students. 

We anticipate that we will have amendments to improve this bill 

as we move along in the process. We encourage you to continue to 

submit your ideas. In fact, Senator Inouye and I are working on an 

amendment to the bill that will address improvements in Native 

Hawaiian education. 

It is so timely and I am glad we have been working well together 

with my colleague, Senator Barrasso, the Vice Chairman, and we 

look forward to an opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,

U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

It is indeed a privilege to work with you and to learn from your 

leadership on this important Committee. I am so grateful for the 

hearing we are holding today and you starting this dialogue with 

this hearing on the extremely important subject of Indian education. 

This Committee has held several oversight hearings on education 

and education-related topics. These hearings confirm that the education and future of Indian children are among the highest priorities for tribal leaders, for the parents of the children, as well as 

for educators. We know that many Indian children are leaders in 

their schools and will be future leaders in their communities. Children who succeed and achieve despite many challenges and many 

disadvantages. 

These hearings have also shown that despite many gains in education over the years, Mr. Chairman, as you and I know and have 

discussed, there is still much work to be done. The dropout rates, 

low academic scores and teacher retention are some of the areas 

that need to be addressed. Parents, schools, Indian communities, 

Congress and the Administration need to work together to reach 

these children before they dropout, before they fail. We need innovative approaches that will prepare these children to be tomorrow’s 

leaders. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses and how this legislation, Mr. Chairman, the bill before us, will begin that work. 

Thank you so much for your leadership. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Barrasso. 

Senator Tester. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER,

U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to say a few things and thank you for holding this hearing. 

3

I want to recognize someone who is going to be on the second 

panel, a good friend of mine, a fellow by the name of Scott Russell 

who is here with the National Congress of American Indians. 

Scott is Secretary of Montana’s Crow Tribe and an incredible 

leader. With his service to that Tribe and southern Montana, we 

thank you for being here. You understand how important education 

is to a prosperous future in Indian country and we look forward to 

hearing your perspective. 

This is a critical hearing, Mr. Chairman. Education is the key to 

improving life in Indian country. Education represents hope in a 

place where we need more hope. 

The purpose of this hearing is to talk about how we are doing, 

to communicate and to collaborate to make sure that Indian kids 

don’t get left behind the next time we reauthorize this Nation’s 

education laws. I think we can all agree that except for pointing 

out the achievement gap, NCLB hasn’t worked all that well in Indian country and we can do better. 

Indian students will be successful when they get three things—

good schools, good motivated teachers and families who support 

their students. My personal experience and past committee hearings have pointed out that they are lucky if they get one of those 

three, let alone all three. 

We have had testimony about a lot of barriers from crumbling 

schools that pose physical danger to lack of preventive and emergency safety procedures to excessive violence to overcrowded classrooms to chronic under funding, lack of teachers, poor attendance, 

hungry students, the list goes on and on. 

Of course the biggest problem is the vicious, I say the vicious, 

cycle of poverty that plagues Indian country. Education and economic development are the only things that are going to break that 

cycle. We need one to get the other. Without good education, economic development projects will not happen; they are simply not 

sustainable. We need a steady supply of Indian country’s best and 

brightest people, young people, to run businesses that are successful. 

Government can’t do it all, but we need to do our part. Our part 

is to provide good schools, do our best to recruit, train and retain 

good teachers, but the community also has a responsibility to provide good teachers and good families. In Montana, 98 percent of the 

Indian kids attend public schools, so my chief concern is to make 

sure that our public schools work for our Native American students. 

In Montana, we are lucky our Superintendent of Public Instruction happens to come from the Black Feet Tribe. Denise Juneau 

truly understands the challenges out there and she has a lot of 

great ideas and has done a lot of great work. 

She had three priorities she expressed to me and they are as follows: close relationship between the Tribes and the public schools; 

we need to make education a community, not just a government responsibility; and wrap around services in schools—counselors, social workers, mental health providers. Oftentimes these services 

are overlooked but they are critical. Lastly is parental involvement. 

Kids won’t take education seriously until or unless their parents 

4

do. We need to provide incentives and motivation to get parents involved. 

In Montana, we have cases where we are doing pretty good. We 

have other cases where we can do a heck of a lot better. I look forward to hearing from you about the opportunities to provide success to our Native American youth because quite frankly, if we are 

going to break the cycle of poverty, it is critically important. 

I want to thank you all for being here and look forward to the 

first panel. 

With that, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Tester from Montana. 

I welcome the witnesses. I appreciate that you have traveled to 

be here with us today and look forward to hearing your testimony 

on this very important matter. 

We have on our panel Mr. William Mendoza, Acting Director, 

White House Initiative on Tribal Colleges and Universities, U.S. 

Department of Education. Also we have Mr. Keith Moore, Director, 

Bureau of Indian Education, U.S. Department of the Interior. 

I ask that you limit your oral testimony to five minutes. Your full 

written testimony will be included in the record. 

Mr. Mendoza, please proceed with your statement. 

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM MENDOZA, ACTING DIRECTOR, 

WHITE HOUSE INITIATIVE ON TRIBAL COLLEGES AND

UNIVERSITIES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Mr. MENDOZA. [greeting in native language]. I greet you all as 

relatives and extend my hand to you with a good heart. My name 

is William Mendoza, the Acting Director of WHITCU. 

I am also a father and an educator so I am very proud to be serving in such a capacity. I was born and raised on the Pine Ridge 

and Rosebud Sioux Reservations and I have attended our BIE public schools and tribal universities. I will spare you the details because it is a humble story in learning the importance of education 

but I want to acknowledge the complexity of these issues because 

on the one hand, I wouldn’t be here today without these institutions, but I also know that we have great concerns regarding our 

American Indian and Alaska Native students. This is important 

work and I am thankful and honored to be a part of us all convening here today. 

On behalf of Secretary Duncan, I would like to thank Chairman 

Akaka, Ranking Member Barrasso and the entire Committee for 

the opportunity to testify today. 

Chairman Akaka, I also want to thank you, Senator Inouye, Senator Johnson from my home State of South Dakota, for introducing 

the Native CLASS Act, also known as S. 1262. We are in the process of reviewing the bill and look forward to discussing it with you 

to achieve the shared goals for Indian students. 

This Administration has taken great strides in implementing a 

policy of Indian self determination and honoring the governmentto-government relationship with tribal nations. President Obama 

has worked hard to reaffirm the Federal Government’s commitment to ensuring that tribal nations are full partners in the Federal family. 

5

The Federal Government has an important role to play in improving the education of Indian students. Congress last reauthorized the ESEA through the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002. Although flawed, NCLB deserves recognition for highlighting the 

achievement gap between poor and minority students and their 

middle class, white counterparts. 

American Indian students are not only performing at levels 

below their peers, they are also not graduating from high school. 

In States with large Native populations, the graduation rates of 

American Indian students falls behind all other racial and ethnic 

groups. Under President Obama and Secretary Duncan’s leadership, the Department’s focus on Indian country has increased dramatically. 

Secretary Duncan and senior officials have held unprecedented 

amounts of listening sessions and regional consultations with leaders across the country. In our meetings, we heard specific ideas 

from tribal officials about the needs of Indian country. Some common themes emerged including collaboration with States in how Indian students are educated. Many tribal leaders said the best way 

to promote Tribal-State collaboration would be to elevate and fund 

tribal education agencies. 

Number two was the need for increased coordination and collaboration between Tribes, States, and the Federal Government to address the needs of Indian students. Number three was preservation 

of Native languages, histories and cultures. 

We also heard several pressing concerns including the following: 

one, many schools located on reservations are in dilapidated condition and do not meet safety codes; two, teacher recruitment and retention is a tremendous challenge for reservation schools, highlighting the importance of grow your own teacher programs and 

ESEA reauthorization; three, Indian students face additional challenges such as violence, substance abuse and high unemployment 

rates in their communities, which hinder educational achievement. 

We look forward to working with this Committee and the House 

committee in a bipartisan manner to address these issues. Our five 

goals for ESEA reauthorization include: preparing college and career ready students by raising standards, improving assessments 

and helping States and districts provide a well rounded education; 

two, strengthen teacher and leader preparation and recruitment; 

three, ensuring the needs of diverse learners are met; four, raising 

the bar and rewarding excellence through incentives such as Race 

to the Top; and five, promoting innovative programs which support, 

recognize and reward local innovation. 

As ESEA reauthorization moves forward, we will continue our 

dialogue with tribal leaders and look forward to working, in a bipartisan way, with this Committee and the House committee to 

achieve our goals for Indian students. 

Thank you and I would be happy to respond to any questions you 

may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Mendoza follows:]

6

1http://nces/ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nies

PREPARED STATEMENT OF WILLIAM MENDOZA, ACTING DIRECTOR, WHITE HOUSE

INITIATIVE ON TRIBAL COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

EDUCATION

Framework: Increasing Partnerships with Tribes to Improve Student 

Achievement 

My name is William Mendoza, and I am the Acting Director of the White House 

Initiative on Tribal Colleges and Universities at the U.S. Department of Education. 

On behalf of Secretary Duncan, I’d like to thank Chairman Akaka, Ranking Member 

Barrasso and the Full Committee for the opportunity to testify today regarding one 

of our Nation’s most underserved student populations. 

Chairman Akaka, I also want to thank you, Senator Johnson of South Dakota, 

and Senator Inouye, for introducing the Native Culture, Language and Access for 

Success in Schools Act. We are in the process of reviewing the bill, and look forward 

to discussing it with you, to achieve our shared goals for Indian students. 

This Administration has taken great strides to implement a policy of Indian selfdetermination and strengthen and honor the government-to-government relationships with Tribal Nations. In December 2010, President Obama invited tribal leaders, Cabinet Secretaries, senior officials and Members of Congress to attend the 

White House Tribal Nations Conference. Similar to the first White House Tribal Nations Conference, held in November 2009, President Obama reaffirmed the Federal 

Government’s commitment to ensure that Tribal Nations are full partners in the 

Federal family. 

Educational Performance of Indian Students 

It’s important to note that only about eight percent of Indian students attend 

schools funded by the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian Education 

(BIE). The vast majority of Indian students, more than 90 percent, attend public 

schools operated by their local school districts. In these schools, there are few 

venues for collaboration between Tribes and States, even in the case of school district-operated public schools located on Tribal lands. 

The Federal Government has an important role to play in improving the education of Indian students. Congress last reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) through the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), in 

2002. Although flawed, NCLB deserves credit for highlighting the achievement gap 

between poor and minority students and their middle-class, white counterparts. It 

has provided us with statistically reliable evidence that Indian students perform at 

levels far below their peers on academic assessments in grades 3–8 and high school. 

In addition, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the largest 

nationally representative and continuing assessment of math and reading, includes 

statistically reliable data on American Indian students’ progress. Using data from 

the NAEP, the Department’s National Center for Education Statistics produced The 

National Indian Education Study 2009 1, finding that American Indian/Alaska Native student scores in both reading and mathematics at both fourth- and eighthgrade levels have not improved since the study was first conducted in 2005. Specifically, in the 2009 assessment in reading, fourth-grade American Indian students 

lagged behind the general population by 18 points and eighth-grade students by 13 

points. As for math, American Indian fourth-grade students scored 15 points lower 

than the general population and 18 points lower by eighth-grade. 

American Indian students attending BIE-funded schools fared even worse than 

the general American Indian student population. Fourth-grade BIE students scored 

25 points lower in reading than the general population and 23 points lower in 

eighth-grade. In math, fourth- grade BIE students score 20 points lower than the 

general population and eighth-grade students lagged behind the general population 

by 19 points. 

American Indian students are not only performing at levels below their peers, 

they are also not graduating from high school. Estimates from the U.S. Department 

of Education show that more than one third of American Indian students from the 

Pacific and Northwest regions of the U.S. fail to graduate high school on time. In 

States such as Alaska, Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, and Washington, American Indian students’ 

62.5 percent graduation rate was behind all other racial/ethnic groups, including 

whites (79.1 percent), Asians (91.7 percent), African Americans (60.9 percent) and 

Hispanics (62.8 percent). 

These statistics make one thing clear—in the area of education, we must do more 

to help Indian students. 

7

What the Department Heard on Its Regional Consultations 

During this Administration, the Department has engaged Indian Country in a 

meaningful way. I am pleased to report that, under President Obama and Secretary 

Duncan’s leadership, the Department’s focus on Indian Country has increased dramatically. In 2009, Secretary Duncan and senior staff held several listening sessions 

at Tribal schools in Montana, New Mexico and North Dakota. On January 11, 2010, 

Secretary Duncan, along with other senior officials, participated in a meeting with 

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, Senior Policy Advisor for Native American Affairs 

at the Domestic Policy Council, Kimberly Teehee, and Indian education experts regarding ways to improve education for Indian students. In March 2010, Secretary 

Duncan held a teleconference with Tribal leaders from across the country, specifically to get their ideas and input on reauthorization of the ESEA. 

Furthermore, senior Department staff, including Under Secretary Martha Kanter, 

General Counsel Charlie Rose and Assistant Secretary Thelma Melendez, held several regional consultations with Tribal leaders across the country. Consultations 

were held on the following dates and locations: April 16, 2010 at the Cook Inlet 

Tribal Council in Anchorage, Alaska; April 19, 2010, in Shawnee, Oklahoma; April 

28 2010, on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota; on May 3, 2010, Santa 

Clara, New Mexico; on June 30, 2010 at the Navajo Reservation in Window Rock, 

Arizona; July 15, 2010 in Puyallup, Washington. In 2011, the Department held listening sessions in cities where there are a large number of Indian students, such 

as Denver, Los Angeles, and Green Bay. 

I am also pleased to report that the Department of Education and the Department 

of the Interior have continued to collaborate since Secretary Duncan and Secretary 

Salazar had their first meeting regarding Indian education on January 11, 2010. 

Since then, the two Departments have worked to combine and coordinate resources 

to maximize the benefits for Indian education. This is how we can improve student 

achievement for American Indian students—by breaking down the silos that stifle 

progress. 

All of these efforts are part of the Department’s commitment to maintaining our 

engagement with Indian Country. 

During our meetings with Tribal leaders on their lands, we heard specific ideas 

from Tribal officials about what works for Indian Country. Several common themes 

emerged during these meetings, including that Tribes:

• Want to collaborate with States about how Indian students are educated. Many 

Tribal leaders testified that the best way to promote Tribal-State collaboration 

would be to elevate and fund Tribal Education Agencies (TEAs).

• Want increased coordination and collaboration between Tribes, States, and the 

Federal Government—to fully address the needs of Indian students. In particular, we heard about the importance of close collaboration between the Department of Education and the Department of the Interior—to which we are 

fully committed.

• Want to preserve their Native languages, histories and cultures.

• Believe that language immersion programs are the best way to increase fluency 

in Native languages and that we should increase support for these programs.

• Generally lack the capacity to compete with States or school districts for competitive Federal grants and funding.

We also heard several pressing concerns, including that:

• Due to high mobility, small numbers, and the fragmentation of the education 

system for Indian students among school district-operated, BIE-operated, and 

Tribal schools, there is a lack of accountability for Indian education in the U.S.

• Many schools located on reservations are in dilapidated condition and do not 

meet safety codes.

• Due to violence, alcohol and drug abuse, and high unemployment rates on reservations, Indian students face additional educational challenges, which ultimately hinder their achievement.

• Teacher recruitment and retention is a tremendous challenge for reservation 

schools. Teacher and staff morale continues to be extraordinarily low, which is 

why Tribal leaders recommend that ESEA reauthorization should increase support for ‘‘grow your own’’ teacher programs that train Tribal citizens to teach 

in their own schools.

Finally, at every consultation, Tribal leaders emphasized the importance of followup. One Tribal leader even said ‘‘consultation’’ had become a ‘‘bad word’’ in Indian 

Country because to ‘‘consult’’ only meant to ‘‘confer,’’ and did not require true colVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:29 Apr 06, 2012 Jkt 068388 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\68388.TXT JACK
8

laboration or partnership. Several Tribal members stated that the current state of 

Indian education was, in many ways, the same as it was in the Meriam Report of 

1928, the 1969 Kennedy report on Indian education, and the 1991 ‘‘Indian Nations 

at Risk’’ report. The facts have been clear for generations—the time for reform is 

now. Through regular consultation, maintaining a meaningful partnership between the 

Department and Tribal leaders, and following through on policy recommendations, 

we can help improve American Indian student achievement. 

Goals for ESEA Reauthorization 

We look forward to working with this Committee as well as the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, in a bipartisan way, to address these issues 

in ESEA reauthorization. We have five broad goals for this reauthorization:

(1) preparing college and career-ready students, through raising standards, improving assessments, and helping States and districts provide a complete, wellrounded education;

(2) great teachers and leaders in every school, through improving teacher and 

leader effectiveness, ensuring that our best teachers and leaders are in the 

schools where they are most needed, including schools that serve Indian students, and strengthening teacher and leader preparation and recruitment;

(3) equity and opportunity for all students, through rigorous and fair accountability at all levels, meeting the needs of diverse learners, and greater resource 

equity;

(4) raising the bar and rewarding excellence, through incentives such as Race 

to the Top, supporting effective public school choice, and promoting a culture 

of college readiness and success; and

(5) promoting innovation and continuous improvement, through programs such 

as the Investing in Innovation Fund (which supports, recognizes, and rewards 

local innovations) and supporting student success by providing comprehensive 

services.

These 5 goals are critically important to improving education for all students, and 

especially for Indian students. Our reauthorization proposal also addresses the 

needs of schools that serve Indian students. We know that Federal funding is crucial for these schools, especially since they are generally small and remote. Our proposal would continue foundational formula funding in Title I and Title II–A, along 

with formula funding in the Rural Education, Indian Education, and English Learner Education programs, among others. 

For most schools serving Indian students, we want to promote Tribal sovereignty 

by allowing these schools to implement locally designed strategies, such as culturally based education and Native language instruction, to improve student 

achievement. We want to give grantees more flexibility under the Indian Education 

Program to carry out Native language restoration and immersion programs, and we 

want to make it easier for Tribes to apply and successfully compete for grants under 

this program when districts choose not to. 

But we also know that many schools with high percentages of Indian students are 

among the lowest-performing. For example, a majority of Montana’s schools in ‘‘restructuring’’ status under ESEA are Indian schools, and many BIE schools are in 

restructuring status, having failed to make adequate yearly progress for five or 

more consecutive years. 

Our reauthorization proposal and fiscal year 2012 budget proposal focus significant attention and support on persistently low-performing schools, with $600 million 

in the School Turnaround Grants program to support the implementation of one of 

four school turnaround models in these schools—with the choice of which model left 

to the school district. The BIE would receive its share of these funds to turn around 

its lowest-performing schools. 

Our proposal also addresses teacher and leader recruitment and retention, especially for schools, like those in Indian communities, where they are needed most. 

The Administration’s budget proposal includes $250 million for programs that create 

or expand high-quality pathways into teaching, along with programs that recruit, 

prepare, and retain effective teachers, principals, and other school leaders. These 

programs will be focused on preparing teachers and leaders to work in high-need 

areas. 

We believe that we can best improve student achievement by involving those who 

best understand the students’ needs. Thus, in order to further the Administration’s 

policy of self-determination for Tribes, and to further Tribal-State collaboration, the 

Department wants to strengthen Tribal education agencies (TEAs) through a TEA 

9

Pilot program that would create opportunities for Tribes to partner with States and 

local educational agencies. TEAs are executive branch agencies of sovereign Tribal 

governments that are responsible for education-related matters (TEAs are not 

schools, and generally don’t deliver educational services directly to students.) Several Tribal officials have testified that strengthening TEAs may provide a mechanism for the Federal Government, TEAs, and State Education Agencies to combine 

and coordinate Federal, Tribal, and State resources, and develop partnerships that 

would promote Tribal sovereignty, increase capacity, and improve accountability in 

schools with high percentages of Indian students. Part of strengthening TEAs must 

include the provision of targeted technical assistance, as well as providing TEAs 

with data about Indian students—as we heard during our consultations, there currently is a lack of such data. 

Conclusion 

As ESEA reauthorization moves forward, we will continue our dialogue with Tribal leaders and look forward to working in a bipartisan way with this Committee to 

achieve our goals for all Indian students. Thank you, and I would be happy to respond to any questions that you may have.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Mendoza. 

Mr. Moore, please proceed with your statement. 

STATEMENT OF KEITH MOORE, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF 

INDIAN EDUCATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Mr. MOORE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Good afternoon, Chairman Akaka, Vice Chairman Barrasso, Senator Murkowski and Senator Tester. 

My name is Keith Moore. I am a Rosebud Sioux tribal member 

from South Dakota. I am the Director of the Bureau of Indian Education. 

I want to thank you for the opportunity to provide the Department of Interior’s views on the Native Culture, Language and Access for Success in Schools Act. 

The Administration is committed to providing high quality educational opportunities for students who are educated in BIE-funded 

schools throughout the country. The BIE is only one of two agencies operating a federal school system. The other entity is the Department of Defense. 

The BIE funds 183 facilities on 64 reservations in 23 States consisting of 123 grant schools, 3 contract schools controlled by Tribes 

and 57 schools directly operated by the BIE. In addition, the BIE 

operates two post secondary institutions, Haskell Indian Nations 

University and Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute, with 

student populations for the fall this past year of 4,200 students in 

those two universities. The BIE also provides funds for 26 tribal 

colleges and universities and two tribal technical colleges. 

Federal funding for the education of American Indian students 

comes from two entities, the U.S. Department of Education and the 

Department of Interior. In 2006, the Assistant Secretary of Indian 

Affairs established the BIE, formerly known as the Office of Indian 

Education Programs. The BIE was renamed and reorganized on 

August 29, 2006 to reflect its importance in the organizational 

structure of the Office of the Assistant Secretary, Indian Affairs. 

Over the years, there has been a transformation in how education is delivered on tribal lands throughout the country. From 

the Snyder Act of 1921 to the current No Child Left Behind Act of 

2001. When delivering education, the BIE takes into consideration 

the whole person, taking into account the spiritual, mental, physVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:29 Apr 06, 2012 Jkt 068388 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\68388.TXT JACK
10

ical and cultural aspects of the individual within his or her family, 

and the tribal or village context. 

The BIE school system employs approximately 4,224 teachers, 

administrators and support personnel in 57 BIE operated schools, 

while many thousands more work in 126 tribal grant and contract 

school systems. 

The Bureau of Indian Education faces a complicated system of 

accountability. The BIE uses 23 different definitions of AYP crafted 

for each State’s public schools and aligned to each State’s academic 

standards, not specifically to BIE schools. As a result, there is not 

a consistent Bureau-wide measure of academic progress. 

BIE’s current initiatives address this issue of accountability system fragmentation by developing a single accountability system 

that emphasizes common standards and a single assessment to 

measure them. BIE’s proposed system concept mirrors the Department of Education’s Blueprint for Reform, which emphasizes measurement of and support for growth in student achievement, reduced time and testing through the use of sophisticated assessments, and increased transparency through the improved use of 

data to guide school improvement. 

Currently, the BIE has to maintain multiple MOUs where States 

or schools are located. Each State has cut scores that bring conflict 

to BIE schools because of differing AYP, adequate yearly progress 

standards. Schools in State A can make AYP while schools in State 

B cannot make AYP, but schools in State B may be outperforming 

schools located in State A. This is due to low cut scores, easier 

standards and possibly easier assessments in State A. 

A single accountability system alone is not sufficient to address 

the capacity needs of the BIE. Many schools are not merely rural 

but geographically isolated from population centers and, as all of 

us know, are in some of the most impoverished communities across 

this country. Consequently, identifying, hiring and retaining high 

quality teachers and administrators are common barriers to improving instruction in rural BIE schools. 

To help address this need, the BIE is partnering with organizations across the country to recruit teachers and administrators, it 

has been a priority for the BIE over the last year and a half and 

will continue to be as we move forward. 

Some of our other continuing initiatives include Safe and Secure 

Schools, High School Excellence, Strengthening and Sustaining the 

Post Secondary Program, Family and Child Education, the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance in Education, the Statewide System of Support and engaging in partnerships with other federal 

programs as well as private entities. 

The BIE has partnered with Clemson University to participate in 

a dropout reduction program through the National Center for Dropout Prevention and is starting work with the Center for Disease 

Control and Prevention on a Healthy Schools initiative. 

Additionally, consistent with President Obama’s initiative to 

identify areas for improvements in government efficiency, the BIE 

has commissioned a BIE-wide evaluation of processes and regulations limited to a review of BIE’s organization, health, achievement, leadership and faculty. 

11

In the meantime, the BIE has sought to bring distinct and typically separate officials, offices and stakeholders to the table to facilitate better communication. The results are already being seen 

as the BIE’s coordination and delivery of services to schools has 

been greatly enhanced. 

This last year and a half has seen a marked increase in collaboration with the Department of Education. As we move forward, we 

look forward to continued collaboration and strong partnership in 

order to improve Indian education. 

S. 1262 was introduced a week ago today. The BIE is still in the 

process of reviewing the bill and cannot make specific comments at 

this time. The BIE is committed to working with the committee on 

S. 1262 in addressing the educational needs of American Indians 

and Alaska Native students, especially in BIE schools. 

In conclusion, education in the United States is primarily a State 

and local responsibility. However, tribal communities have not 

been afforded appropriate control over education in their own communities in the past. Outside interests have historically imposed 

their will on tribal communities and defined the futures of Indian 

communities through their children. 

Reauthorization of ESEA represents a unique opportunity for all 

of us to ensure that the Act works for American Indian and Alaska 

Native communities. The reauthorized ESEA can support the selfdetermination of Indian Tribes and create an educational system 

that values tribal cultures and languages and also ensures accountability for student performance and achievement. 

Thank you for providing the BIE this opportunity to testify. We 

are committed to working with this committee, with tribes, with 

the Department of Education and other partners as the reauthorization of ESEA moves forward through Congress. 

I am happy to answer any questions the Committee may have. 

Thanks again. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Moore follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KEITH MOORE, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF INDIAN EDUCATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Good afternoon Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and members of the Committee. My name is Keith Moore and I am the Director of the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE). Thank you for the opportunity to provide the Department of the Interior’s views on the Native Culture, Language and Access for Success in Schools Act. 

The Administration is committed to providing high-quality educational opportunities 

for approximately 42,000 students who are educated in BIE-funded elementary and 

secondary schools throughout the country. 

Background 

The BIE is only one of two agencies operating a Federal school system. The other 

entity is the Department of Defense. The BIE funds 183 facilities on 64 reservations 

in 23 States, consisting of 123 grant schools and 3 contract schools controlled by 

tribes, and 57 schools directly operated by the BIE. In addition, the BIE operates 

two postsecondary institutions, Haskell Indian Nations University and Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute, with student populations for the fall through 

the summer semesters for 2009/2010 of 2,405 and 1,818, respectively. The BIE also 

provides funds for 26 Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) and two tribal technical colleges. 

Federal funding for the education of American Indian students comes from both 

the Department of the Interior and the Department of Education. The 183 elementary and secondary schools funded by BIE educate approximately 42,000 students, 

or approximately 7 percent of the total American Indian and Alaska Native student 

population in the United States. The great majority (over 90 percent) of American 

12

Indian and Alaska Native children are educated in non-BIE public schools under the 

supervision of their local education agencies. 

In 2006, the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs established the BIE. Formerly 

known as the Office of Indian Education Programs, the BIE was renamed and reorganized on August 29, 2006, to reflect its importance in the organizational structure 

of the Office of the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs. The BIE is headed by a Director, who is responsible for the line direction and management of education functions, including the formulation of policies and procedures, the supervision of program activities and the expenditure of funds appropriated for education functions. 

There have been several major legislative actions that affected the education of 

American Indians since the Snyder Act of 1921. First, the Indian Reorganization Act 

of 1934 supported the teaching of Indian history and culture in Bureau-funded 

schools (prior to 1934 it had been Federal policy to acculturate and assimilate Indian people through a boarding school system). Second, the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975 (P.L. 93–638) provided authority for federally recognized tribes to contract with the Secretary of the Interior to operate Bureau-funded schools. The Education Amendments Act of 1978 (P.L. 95–561) and further technical amendments (P.L. 98–511, 99–99, and 100–297) provided funds directly to tribally-operated schools, empowered Indian school boards, encouraged 

local hiring of teachers and staff, and established a direct line of authority between 

the Education Director and the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs. The No Child 

Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) (P.L. 107–110) brought additional requirements to 

the schools by establishing accountability metrics and goals for improving their students’ academic performance. 

As stated in 25 C.F.R. § 32.3, BIE’s mission is to provide quality education opportunities from early childhood through life in accordance with a tribe’s needs for cultural and economic well-being, in keeping with the wide diversity of Indian tribes 

and Alaska Native villages as distinct cultural and governmental entities. Further, 

the BIE takes into consideration the whole person by taking into account the spiritual, mental, physical, and cultural aspects of the individual within his or her family and tribal or village context. The BIE school system employs approximately 

4,224 teachers, administrators, and support personnel in the 57 BIE-operated 

schools, while many thousands more work in the 126 tribal grant and contract 

school systems. 

Bureau of Indian Education Student Achievement Initiatives 

The Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) faces a complicated system of accountability. The negotiated rulemaking process resulted in a joint decision with the Department of Education that the BIE would implement NCLB using State definitions 

of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for BIE-funded schools based on the State in 

which the school is located. The BIE uses 23 different definitions of AYP that are 

crafted for each State’s public schools and aligned to each State’s academic standards, not specifically to BIE schools. As a result, there is no consistent, Bureau-wide 

measure of academic progress. 

BIE’s current initiatives address this issue of accountability system fragmentation 

by developing a single accountability system that emphasizes common standards 

and a single assessment to measure them. BIE’s proposed system concept mirrors 

the Department of Education’s Blueprint for Reform, which emphasizes, measurement of and support for growth in student achievement, reduced time spent in testing through the use of sophisticated assessments, and increased transparency 

through the improved use of data to guide school improvement. Such a system of 

accountability would enable better and faster responses to weaknesses in school performance to improve student achievement. For example, BIE has to enter and maintain 23 separate MOUs with each state where schools are located. Each state has 

cut scores that bring conflict to BIE schools because of differing AYP standards. 

Schools in State A can make AYP and schools in State B may not make AYP, but 

may be out performing schools located in State A. This maybe is due to low cut 

scores and easier standards and assessments in State A. 

Bureau of Indian Education Initiatives 

A unitary accountability system alone is not sufficient to address the capacity 

needs of the BIE. A unitary accountability system must be enhanced through other 

focused efforts to improve staffing, and to address other recognized issues facing the 

BIE. Many BIE schools are not merely rural, but geographically isolated from population centers. Consequently, identifying, hiring, and retaining high quality teachers 

are common barriers to improving instruction at rural BIE schools. 

To help address this need, the BIE has partnered with organizations such as 

Teach for America to recruit teachers to work at rural schools and this has been 

13

a priority for the BIE over the last year and a half. Professional capacity, however, 

is not the only capacity that requires development in the BIE schools. 

Some of our continuing initiatives include Safe and Secure Schools, High School 

Excellence, Strengthening and Sustaining the Postsecondary Program, Family And 

Child Education, McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance in Education, the Statewide 

System of Support, and engaging in partnerships with other federal programs as 

well as private entities. The BIE has partnered with Clemson University to participate in a drop-out reduction program through the National Center for Drop-Out 

Prevention and is starting work with the Center for Disease Control and Prevention 

on the Healthy Schools initiative. 

Additionally, consistent with President Obama’s initiative to identify areas for improvements in government efficiency, the BIE has commissioned a BIE-wide evaluation of processes and regulations limited to a review of BIE’s organization, health, 

achievement, leadership and faculty. In the meantime, the BIE has sought to bring 

distinct and typically separate officials, offices and stakeholders to the table to facilitate better communication. The results are already being seen, as the BIE’s coordination in the delivery of services to schools has been greatly enhanced. 

The last year and a half has seen a marked increase in the collaboration between 

the Department of Education and the Department of the Interior. With the BIE’s 

increased responsiveness to the advice offered by the Department of Education on 

program implementation issues, and the BIE’s increased capability and improved 

compliance with the Department of Education’s reporting requirements, the BIE has 

taken considerable strides to increase its accountability for program implementation. This collaboration between Interior and Education is expected to continue into 

the foreseeable future as relationships forged between the departments continue to 

strengthen. 

S. 1262 was introduced a week ago today. The BIE is still in the process of reviewing the bill and cannot make specific comments at this time. The BIE is committed to working with the Committee on S. 1262 in addressing the educational 

needs of American Indian and Alaska Native students, especially in BIE schools. 

Conclusion 

Education in the United States is primarily a State and local responsibility. However, tribal communities have not been afforded appropriate control over education 

in their own communities in the past. Outside interests have historically imposed 

their will on tribal communities and defined the futures of Indian communities 

through their children. 

Reauthorization of the ESEA represents a unique opportunity to ensure that the 

Act works for American Indian and Alaska Native communities. The reauthorized 

ESEA can support the self-determination of Indian tribes and create an educational 

system that values tribal cultures and languages. 

Thank you for providing the BIE this opportunity to testify. We are committed 

to working with this Committee, with the tribes and with the Department of Education as the reauthorization of ESEA moves forward through Congress. 

I am happy to answer any questions the Committee may have.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for your statement, Mr. 

Moore. 

I would like to defer my questions and ask Senator Tester for his 

and Senator Murkowski for hers. 

Mr. TESTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the privilege. 

Mr. Mendoza, you talked about language, history and culture 

being important to be a part of the curriculum for Native American 

students. Can you give me any sort of idea on how many schools 

actually incorporate language, history and culture? 

Mr. MENDOZA. Unfortunately, I don’t have that information 

available right now, but we do know that throughout the country, 

and Indian country especially, there is a concerted effort through 

Department of Education funding, namely Title VII, where we have 

both professional development and demonstration grants that support efforts in this area, both in terms of implementing culturally 

responsive pedagogy and also from our language areas, we are focusing on looking at the effectiveness of those programs as well in 

14

the schools. I can certainly provide you with more detailed information. 

Mr. TESTER. I am sure it is a pretty small amount. I think the 

language, culture and history is pretty important. Are you able to 

monitor your grants you are putting out for that purpose? That is 

where I think I heard you say there were grants available for this 

purpose to see if it is making any difference as far as testing goes 

and overall success. 

Mr. MENDOZA. As you know, the research is limited in this area. 

One of the direct results of the consultations was looking at how 

the Department of Education utilizes its ability to conduct research 

on a national level pertaining to this. This is an area that the Department of Education is looking at to examine. 

There are areas where we evaluate our programs of course. We 

are looking at how we can contribute to the body of best practices. 

Mr. TESTER. The other thing you mentioned, Mr. Mendoza, is 

teacher recruitment and that retention is critically important. I 

agree. You talked about home grown teachers. I couldn’t agree with 

you more. Are there any efforts in the Department to encourage 

this and how are you doing it if there is? 

Mr. MENDOZA. Of course it is a key area for us. Again, I mentioned within Title VII we have professional development that goes 

towards institutions conducting this kind of work. I think of Montana and the rich tribal college and university system that is thriving there, this is an example of that and partnerships with schools 

like Montana State and the University of Montana are key to that 

and also tapping into the community colleges to make sure our 

teachers are coming from those communities and understand those 

communities best but are addressing the level of teaching we want 

to generate the outcomes. 

Mr. TESTER. Let me ask more specifically. Poverty reigns pretty 

high, on Montana reservations anyway, and if you have a student 

who wants to go to school and become a teacher, and they have the 

skills, the desire, the drive, but don’t have the money. Are there 

any programs out there that might help and encourage them to go 

into education? 

Mr. MENDOZA. If this is an Indian student, yes, there are monies 

available. I can provide you with that program information. 

Mr. TESTER. Hopefully it is obtainable without too much red tape 

but enough to make sure that we are spending it wisely. 

Mr. Moore, you talked about working on the ESEA and making 

sure that it works for Indian schools when the final product comes 

out. Are you working with the Department of Education and are 

you giving them input on ESEA from a Native American student 

standpoint? What are some of the things you are advocating for in 

ESEA, if you are doing that? 

Mr. MOORE. We have and continue to work closely with the U.S. 

Department of Education on ESEA and Indian education as we 

move forward. I don’t want to sound standoffish, Senator, but the 

specifics are obviously being discussed and vetted and trying to become clear in terms of what it is that we would like to see from 

the BIE standpoint in terms of what would specifically be in ESEA. 

15

We think we are close to having some of our stances in place, but 

I would like to be cautious in terms of talking specifics at this 

point. 

Mr. TESTER. It is no problem. 

The Secretary of Education was in northern Cheyenne about a 

year and a half or two years ago and one of the things a student 

said to him while he was there, and you don’t need to respond, this 

is more of a comment, was that people need to demand more of us. 

If we are going to achieve excellence, we need more demanded of 

us. 

I do not want our Native American kids to get a second class 

education. It is a worldwide economy that we live in. I want to 

build the economy in each one of the States and Indian country but 

by the same token, when they come out of school, they have to be 

able to compete. I would just ask you to keep that in mind. We 

don’t want second class education, we want the very best. If we are 

going to break the cycle of poverty, that is what has to happen. 

Thank you both for being here. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Tester. 

Senator Murkowski. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI,

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for 

this hearing today and for getting out front on the issue of education and how we provide educational opportunities for American 

Indians, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians. 

I also serve on the Health Committee, so I am going to be looking 

forward to working with you all as we try to deal with some of the 

challenges. I don’t like the statistics that are out there. I am sure 

that you don’t and many of the people in this room. 

Mr. Mendoza, you mentioned that the National Indian Education 

Study of 2009 and the findings based on the NAEP data that 

American Indian students lag behind their non-Indian peers on 

these NAEP standards. It is my understanding, and I would like 

confirmation of this if it is not correct, but it is my understanding 

that the study was unable to provide reliable statistics on Alaska 

Native students because of the small sample size. Is that, in fact, 

correct? 

Mr. MENDOZA. I can certainly provide you with more detailed information. I don’t have full understanding of the research model 

that goes into the National Indian Education Study but I do know 

that the sample size is taking into consideration both high and low 

density population schools. It is broken up by region. 

This augmented sample they used for the National Indian Education has naturally occurring data pools that are derived from 

NCLB directly. In some cases, and I don’t know if this is particular 

to Alaskans—I apologize—but we may be able to look at Alaska by 

itself and see how that relates to this bigger pool of fourth and 

eighth grade data which is about 9,000 fourth graders and 8,000 

eighth graders respectively. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I would appreciate it if you could look into 

it because if we are going to be relying on data, we need to know 

that the data that has been collected is sufficient upon which to 

16

base some decision. If, in fact, the sample size was not sufficient, 

hopefully we can remedy that through an opportunity to look at a 

larger sample of our Alaska Native students. 

I had a rural constituent, a superintendent of a rural school district in northwest Alaska, who was being critical of the NAEP data. 

He says it doesn’t provide him with the reliable information because, in his opinion, there was cultural bias that was inherent in 

that test. He conveyed to me a story, a situation where the students were asked to circle pictures of food. One of the pictures included in the grouping was a picture of a whale. For Alaska Native 

students and many parts of the State, yes, whale is not only a food, 

it is a staple of their diet. When it comes back corrected, the whale 

is not a food according to those people who are sitting wherever 

they are correcting the tests in the lower 48 where whale is not 

considered a food. He pointed that out as a clear example of where 

you may see cultural bias within the testing itself. 

I guess the question I would ask you is whether you also believe 

that there is some inherent cultural bias in the testing that could 

lead to inaccuracies in these test results. We look at the results, 

we see there is a lag. Is it possible that there may be some issues 

within the testing itself? 

Mr. MENDOZA. I certainly appreciate your concern. I think you 

point out very well the difficulties in meeting the diverse needs of 

our learners, especially from the tribal perspective, as we look 

across the complexities of our 565 tribal nations. In terms of the 

assessment, I can’t speak directly to that specific test, but it is always a challenge just as an educator myself looking at if the assessments are really measuring what you are planning to do. 

I think that would be a question to direct to our National Center 

for Education Statistics. I would certainly have them follow up on 

that as to what that means. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I would agree we can certainly do that but 

I think it is important for those within the Department of Education to be looking to see if perhaps we are not getting fully accurate data because you have cultural issues that present themselves, 

a child reading a simple story problem that has a story about a 

sidewalk and the child has no clue what a sidewalk is because we 

don’t have sidewalks in most of the villages in Alaska, doesn’t even 

know what the terminology means. It is little things, it is anecdotal, but it does cause me to wonder. 

Mr. Moore, let me ask you as you are more than aware, in Alaska we do not receive BIE funding for our schools. Can you tell the 

Committee whether or not the legislation we are considering—and 

I appreciate the fact you are just now looking at it—might have 

any impact on Alaska Tribes? 

Mr. MOORE. It would be very difficult to do that right now, Senator, to comment specifically on it. I would like to hold that until 

I return my thoughts to you but at this time, I would like to reserve those. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. As you do your review and make an assessment to the committee, I would be curious to know whether or not 

you think it would have an impact and if so, how it might impact 

Alaska Tribes. 

Mr. MOORE. Certainly. 

17

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Murkowski. 

Mr. Mendoza, throughout the consultations process, and in committee records, Native leaders have asked for a senior level position 

at the Department of Education to oversee Native education. Is the 

Department taking steps to fulfill that request? 

Mr. MENDOZA. Thank you, Senator, for that question. 

We also heard from tribal leaders how important it is to have a 

senior level position for Indian education. Secretary Duncan has already made a commitment to create a senior level advisor who 

would be able to drive the Department’s Indian education agenda 

on a daily basis. Our challenge is making sure that position is sustainable and that it is institutionalized. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Moore, the Native CLASS Act has a large 

focus on bringing language and culture into the classroom. We 

have also heard that this is a priority for this Administration. How 

can the Bureau of Indian Education bring language and culture 

into the classroom in its 184 schools? 

Mr. MOORE. Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman. 

We believe that we have been one of the biggest supporters over 

the years of language and culture when we look at budget figures. 

If you look at our Indian Student Equalization Program, affectionately called the ISEP Program, within that is a weighted figure 

that we fund a different number of line items and one of them is 

language. In our last fiscal year, we appropriated $25,380,100 to 

our 183 schools specifically for language and culture development. 

We will continue to have that line item and our line item goes out 

to schools on a per school basis. 

One of the thing we would like to do going forward is to continue 

to support funding for that and also begin to have a nice dialogue 

about the curricula and assessments that are in place through 

those dollars that are really impacting students with language development. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for that. I have other 

questions that I will submit to you for the record. 

Senator Tester, do you have any further questions. Ms. Murkowski? 

Let me say thank you so much to this panel for being here today 

and providing this valuable information. I just want you to know 

that we want to improve Indian education in our country and look 

forward to working with you on this issue. Thank you very much. 

If you have any further comments, Mr. Mendoza? 

Mr. MENDOZA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I wanted to also let the Committee know that the National Advisory Council on Indian Education is releasing their report today 

and we will provide you with that report. We would love to discuss 

that with you further at a later time. 

The CHAIRMAN. Very good. 

Mr. Moore? 

Mr. MOORE. I have one last comment for Senator Murkowski. 

One thing that came to mind was Elizabeth Hensley, a person in 

the Assistant Secretary’s office who is working specifically on AlasVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:29 Apr 06, 2012 Jkt 068388 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\68388.TXT JACK
18

ka Native issues. It just came to my head that may be a good place 

for us to go to talk about the specifics of your question. 

I would also like to say to Senator Tester, you do have a great 

leader in Montana, Denise Juneau was the Indian Education Director when I was the Indian Education Director in South Dakota. A 

few weeks ago, we had the chance at a Rural Chief State Schools 

Officers meeting to sit down with her for a couple days. She is a 

very impressive, very strong leader, a good woman and leader in 

terms of what is going on in Montana. 

Mr. TESTER. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Let me just give you another opportunity if you 

have any other comments to make about Indian education, please 

do that. 

Thank you very much. We really appreciate you being here. 

Let me call the second panel. I would like to invite the second 

panel to the witness table. First is the Honorable Cedric Cromwell, 

Chairman of the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe from Mashpee, Massachusetts. Mr. Cromwell also serves on the Board of Directors of 

the United South and Eastern Tribes. 

Next is Mr. Scott Russell, Rocky Mountain Region Area Vice 

President for the National Congress of American Indians. Mr. Russell also serves as the Secretary for the Crow Tribe located in Crow 

Agency Montana. 

Ms. Amy Bowers is a staff attorney for the Native American 

Rights Fund located in Boulder, Colorado. 

I want to welcome you all to this hearing. 

Chairman Cromwell, will you please proceed with your testimony? 

STATEMENT OF HON. CEDRIC CROMWELL, CHAIRMAN,

MASHPEE WAMPANOAG TRIBE; BOARD OF DIRECTORS,

UNITED SOUTH AND EASTERN TRIBES 

Mr. CROMWELL. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Senator Akaka 

and the Committee. 

I want to thank you from the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe and 

the USET Board of Directors, for holding this hearing and the diligent work that you do for Indian country. It is a very important 

issue so we appreciate it and thank the Committee. S. 1262 is very 

important. The revisions that are going to happen towards federal 

education laws that support the experience of Native American 

children are very important to us, so we appreciate what you are 

doing. 

Representing USET, there are 26 Tribes that comprise USET, located in 12 States from Maine to Florida and west into eastern 

Texas. In comparison to our sister Tribes west of the Mississippi 

River, USET Tribes have smaller populations and smaller reservations. In the case of the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe, we are a 

Tribe without a federal land base, we are a landless Tribe, so we 

have no reservation to conduct governmental activities including 

economic development, housing, health care and education. We are 

under funded in many ways by the Federal Government not in 

comparison with Tribes throughout the United States but also compared to other USET Tribes. 

19

Our people suffer from high rates of poverty, related illnesses 

and issues including a high school graduation rate of only 48 percent. It is our belief that education is the best way to not only provide our children with the tools they need to be successful, productive adults, but also to lift our Tribe out of poverty for generations 

to come. 

While our Tribe has taken great steps to offer support to and advocate for our children in the public school system, we simply do 

not have the resources to fully address the problem. Currently, we 

have five service delivery areas in Massachusetts with three major 

concentrations of 300-plus enrolled tribal members in Barnstable, 

Bristol and Suffolk Counties. Presently, we receive very little in the 

way of Title VII money, $40,000 to be exact, which is used to fund 

tutoring, Native American teachers, educational advocacy and development of curricula designed to meet the learning style of our 

tribal students in public schools. The funding is clearly deficient 

and fails to provide our Tribe with the minimum resources we need 

to confront the very real challenges of Mashpee Wampanoag students in the public school system. 

Too many of our children are desperate to be treated with respect 

and dignity in the education system. Too often, children with learning challenges or different needs are over medicated and they say 

given them Ritalin, that is the answer, and their individual and 

culturally specific needs are ignored. The results are clear when 

fewer than half of our tribal citizens are receiving a high school diploma. 

We need funding and authority to do more for our children. That 

is why I am here today to express my support for the Native 

CLASS Act. We applaud the bill language that would give public 

schools greater flexibility in designing programs to meet the needs 

of their Indian students, the requirement for a local educational 

agency, LEA, to enter into a cooperative agreement with the Tribe 

to assist with the planning and operation of the program, and the 

requirement for the LEA to develop programs in consultation with 

committees comprised of Indian parents and teachers. 

USET is disappointed that S. 1262 does not include a key recommendation of the tribal organization team that called for the 

creation of centers for innovation and tribally directed education. 

The purpose of this proposal is to assist Tribes with capacity building to enable them to effectively exercise their rights and authority 

to direct delivery of educational services to Indian children. We 

urge the Committee to amend S. 1262 to include this proposal. 

Finally, we are strongly in support of the initiative within the 

bill to assist the Tribes in recruiting high quality teachers and 

principals. We are especially interested in implementing the Troops 

As Teachers Program, given the high percentage of Native American citizens who volunteer to serve in the U.S. armed forces. 

In addition, in Indian country, we talk a lot about self determination and one of our core beliefs is that as tribal nations, we must 

be able to provide for our people. This bill not only works toward 

the goal of improving the ability of Tribes to education our young 

people, but it also increases the ability of individual tribal children 

to achieve self determination by giving them the opportunities and 

tools they need to become healthy and productive adults. 

20

Thank you my friends. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Cromwell follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. CEDRIC CROMWELL, CHAIRMAN, MASHPEE

WAMPANOAG TRIBE; BOARD OF DIRECTORS, UNITED SOUTH AND EASTERN TRIBES

Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Cedric 

Cromwell. I am Chairman of the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe in Massachusetts. I 

appear here today to present testimony on behalf of the United South and Eastern 

Tribes on S. 1262, the Native CLASS Act which makes valuable and needed revisions to Federal education laws to improve the educational experience of Indian children. 

The 26 Tribes that comprise USET are located in 12 states—from Maine to Florida and west into eastern Texas. In comparison to our sister tribes west of the Mississippi River, the USET tribes have smaller populations and smaller reservations. 

Nonetheless, through the strength that comes from unity of purpose and the shared 

objectives of improving the quality of life of Indian people and full recognition of the 

sovereign rights of tribal governments, USET has become a highly regarded Indian 

Country advocate over the past 42 years. 

In the case of the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe, we are a Tribe without a federal 

land base, so we have no reservation on which to conduct our governmental activities, including economic development, housing, health care, and education. Our people suffer disproportionally from poverty-related illnesses and issues, including a 

high school graduation rate of only 48 percent. It is our belief that education is the 

surest way to not only provide our children with the tools they need to be successful, 

productive adults, but also to lift our Tribe out of poverty for generations to come. 

While our Tribe has taken great steps to offer support to and advocate for our 

children in the public school system, we simply do not have the resources to fully 

address the problem. Too many of our children are desperate to be treated with respect and dignity in the education system. Too often, children with learning challenges or different needs are overmedicated, and their individual and culturally-specific needs are ignored. 

We need the tools to do more for our children. We need the funding and the authority to partner with the public schools to make sure our children are receiving 

the services they may need, to help combat health-related issues, provide culturallyappropriate curriculum, give Native parents a voice of boards and committees, and 

to train Native teachers. 

That is why I am here today to express my support for the Native CLASS Act. 

S. 1262 has two core and inter-related themes: First, requiring schools to take seriously their responsibility to meet the unique educational needs of Indian children 

in order to help them achieve academically; and second, recognizing that Indian 

tribes possess governmental authority in the performance of elementary and secondary education programs for their children. 

USET is particularly equipped to address S. 1262 issues because the children of 

our member tribes are educated in both public schools and in tribally-operated 

schools funded by the Bureau of Indian Education. S. 1262 contains important provisions for Indian children enrolled in both types of schools. Working with our sister 

organizations, the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) and the National 

Indian Education Association (NIEA), USET helped develop legislative recommendations for the Committee’s consideration. We are very pleased that a large percentage 

of our recommendations were included in S. 1262. 

USET Children in Public Schools 

Where our USET tribal children are educated in public schools, they constitute 

a small percentage of the overall student population, a circumstance that often 

means our Indian children are overlooked by school authorities. Since some 90 percent of Indian children in the nation are educated in public schools, tribes must 

have a meaningful role in the delivery of services to these students. Thus, we are 

particularly supportive of the S.1262 provisions intended to require States and local 

public schools that educate Indian children to take into account the educational and 

cultural needs of those children in designing their educational plans. We also heartily support requiring these public schools to provide training for teachers in the Indian cultures of the Indian children, and to develop culturally responsive teaching 

and learning strategies to better serve our children. Contracts with Indian tribes 

would be the most effective way to carry out these obligations. 

USET applauds the insertion of requirements throughout the ESEA titles for 

States and local educational agencies to consult with tribes on a continuing basis 

21

in the development of school plans and programs, and the establishment of meaningful mechanisms through which Indian tribes can elect to exercise hand-on control 

over educational programs. 

Since the public school student populations of USET tribes is comparatively small 

in the communities in which they are located, our tribes will not qualify for the bill’s 

innovative programs for tribes whose children constitute high percentages of public 

school populations—particularly on-reservation public schools. Thus, I want to focus 

on the bill’s provisions that have the potential to affirmatively impact the public 

schools in which USET tribal children are enrolled. 

Safe and Healthy Schools for Native American Students. USET supports bill Sec. 

141 which requires the Secretary of Education to create unique programs to target 

social and nutritional issues prevalent in Indian communities, such as alcohol/drug 

abuse; suicide; violence; teen pregnancy; obesity; and school dropout. One affirmative effort expressly mentioned is establishment of tribal-specific school gardens to 

aid Indian students in pursuing sound nutrition goals.

• Recommendations:

(1) Sec. 141 does not identify the schools that should offer the programs the Secretary develops under this authority. The provision should be amended to require the Secretary to supply these programs to all public schools that are eligible for the Formula Grant Programs under Title VII (schools with 10 or more 

Indian students are eligible), and to strongly encourage them to provide appropriate programs for their Indian student population, perhaps as part of the program carried out under the Formula Grant.

(2) It seems to us that Indian tribes are well-equipped to work with the Secretary in designing the programs called for by Sec. 141. Thus, we suggest the 

provision be amended to direct the Secretary to work in cooperation with tribes, 

to the extent practicable, in developing the programs.

(3) We recommend that Sec. 141 be amended to require the Secretary to establish these programs within one year after enactment of S. 1262.

Title VI, Part A—Formula Grant Program [Bill Secs. 152–159]. This is a significant program for USET tribes that operate BIE-funded schools, but it is even more 

significant for the tribes whose children attend public schools where Indian components in the curriculum are not customary. Its purpose is to infuse into the educational program an Indian component for these students who might otherwise have 

no opportunity for culturally relevant curriculum. Since tribes are already involved 

in development of the Title VII programs offered at the BIE-funded schools, I will 

focus my comments on the revisions that strengthen this program for Indian children in public schools. I express gratitude to the bill’s sponsors for accepting these 

recommendations offered by our tribal organization workgroup (NCAI, NIEA and 

USET).

• Indian-specific programs. We applaud the bill language that would give public 

schools greater flexibility in designing programs to meet the needs of their Indian students. The current law ties the Title VII program too closely to Title 

I requirements, leaving little opportunity for schools to offer programs that address the specific educational and cultural needs of the Indian student population. Similarly, we support the requirement that a school proposing to combine Title VII grant funds into a schoolwide program (serving all students in 

the school, both Indian and non-Indian) must first demonstrate that a 

schoolwide program would provide benefits to the Indian students that would 

not be achieved if the funds were used for a program serving Indian students, 

only. The ‘‘Indian’’ character of these funds should be preserved.

• Tribe-School cooperative agreements. We also strongly support the requirement 

for a Local Educational Agency, at the request of a tribe with a plurality of Indian children enrolled with the LEA, to enter into a cooperative agreement with 

the tribe to assist with the planning and operation of the program. Not only will 

this provision advance the concept that Indian tribes have the right and responsibility to be meaningfully involved in educational matters, a partnership between the LEA and the tribe will result in more focused and effective programs.

• Tribal representation on Parent Committee. A core component of the Formula 

Grant Program is the requirement for the LEA to develop programs in consultation with a committee comprised of Indian parents and teachers. As recommended by USET, S. 1262 expands that committee to include representatives 

of Indian tribes located within 50 miles of the school if such tribes have children 

enrolled in the school. This provision recognizes that often Indian people prefer 

to act through their tribes in relationships with non-tribal entities such as pubVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:29 Apr 06, 2012 Jkt 068388 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\68388.TXT JACK
22

lic school districts. Plus, tribal representation on these committees can provide 

valuable program experience and continuity that individual parents alone cannot provide, as when their children age out of school, parental participation is 

likely to end.

• Provisions that facilitate establishment of a program. It is unfortunate that 

some eligible LEAs do not bother to apply for a Title VII grant. S. 1262 seeks 

to change this outcome by making it easier for an Indian entity to apply for a 

grant when the LEA does not do so. It authorizes a tribe representing a plurality of the students to apply for the grant and operate a program. Or if neither the LEA nor a tribe applies, a committee comprised of Indian people in the 

community may apply to be the grantee. That latter option can help provide a 

program for Indian children in schools that are far distant from any tribe. We 

also support the provision requiring the Secretary of Education to perform outreach to eligible LEAs who have not applied for a grant and supply technical 

assistance to help them do so.

Recommended revision: On page 103, lines 6–7 should refer to ‘‘schools funded

by the Bureau of Indian Education’’ rather than only to schools operated by the 

BIE, as the Secretary’s outreach and assistance efforts should extend to all BIEfunded schools, both those operated by BIE and those operated by tribes.

• Student Eligibility Forms. We thank the bill sponsors for including the USET 

recommendation that would require an LEA to maintain in its records a determination that a child is an eligible Indian and thus prohibit a practice at some 

schools that a student’s Indian eligibility be re-proved year after year.

Coordination of Indian Student Information. USET supports the proposed new 

Sec. 7137 for creation of a mechanism to facilitate the orderly exchange of Indian 

student educational and health records between schools. The mobility of Indian children between public schools, between BIE-funded schools, and between public and 

BIE funded requires a system for schools to easily access and supply student records 

so that the educational progress of the student is not interrupted by the failure of 

his/her records to follow the student to a new school. 

Tribal Education Agencies Pilot Project. This innovative provision would create a 

new Sec. 7124 to authorize tribes (or tribal consortia) to administer State educational agency functions through grants from the Secretary of Education. The ultimate objective is to give tribes a meaningful opportunity to exercise their governmental authority over elementary and secondary education affecting their children.

• Recommendation: USET is disappointed that S. 1262 does not include a key recommendation of the tribal organization team that called for creation of Centers 

for Innovation in Tribally-Directed Education in ESEA Title V [Innovative Programs]. The purpose of this proposal is to assist tribes with capacity-building 

to enable them to effectively exercise their rights and authority to direct delivery of educational services to Indian children. We urge the Committee to amend 

S. 1262 to include this proposal.

Authorization of Appropriations for Title VII, Part A. Our tribal organization team 

recommended new funding levels for the programs authorized by Title VII, Part A 

to properly fund both existing programs and the new ones recommended by the 

team. Those recommendations are included in S. 1262 as revisions to Sec. 7152. We 

must point out, however, that since the Akaka bill adds three additional new programs to Part A, the authorization of appropriations must be increased to appropriately fund all programs. The three additional programs added to Part A by S. 

1262 are laudable and should not have to compete with other existing and new programs for funding. The three programs added by S. 1262 are:

• Bill Sec. 162 creating a new Sec. 7125—Teacher and Administrator Pipeline for 

Native American Students

• Bill Sec. 163 creating a new Sec. 7126—National Board Certification Incentive 

Demonstration Program

• Bill Sec. 164 creating a new Sec. 7127—Tribal Language Immersion Schools. 

We note that this provision carries its own authorization of appropriations; 

thus, notice of this separate authorization should appear in Sec. 7152 to avoid 

any confusion.

USET Children in Bureau of Indian Education-Funded Schools 

Seven USET tribes operate a total of 16 schools on their reservations that are 

funded by the Bureau of Indian Education in the Interior Department. These 

schools are operated under Indian Self-Determination Act contracts or Tribally Controlled Schools Act grants. USET has a keen interest in assuring that these schools 

23

are adequately funded and that the tribes have the authority to operate these 

schools efficiently and effectively. For these reasons, USET worked with the tribal 

organization team to recommend provision to help achieve these goals. 

We identify below provisions in S. 1262 that directly benefit tribally-operated BIE 

schools and urge the Committee to retain them:

• ESEA Title I—Improving the Academic Achievement of Disadvantaged Students.

These revisions to NCLBA Sec. 1116(g) are intended to facilitate approval of a 

tribally-proposed alternative definition of Adequate Yearly Progress by placing 

a deadline on the Secretary of the Interior for action on a tribal proposal. Current law imposes no deadline for agency action, a circumstance that has prevented any tribal proposal from being approved.

• ESEA Title II—Recruiting High Quality Teachers and Principals.

—S. 1262 accepts our recommendation to include BIE-funded schools in the definition of ‘‘high needs LEA’’ to make these schools eligible for funding to aid 

in the recruitment and retention of high quality education professionals.

—We also support the proposal to increase to 5 percent the set-aside for distribution to BIEfunded schools for teacher/principal recruitment and retention 

activities.

—The bill would also make information from State teacher recruitment clearinghouses available to BIE schools in the State.

—Amendments to the Math and Science Teacher program and the Troops to 

Teachers program to provide for BIE schools eligibility.

—USET also strongly supports the proposed new Sec. 2161 which creates an Indian Educator Scholarship Program intended to encourage more Indian people to enter the teaching profession and to serve in schools with significant 

Indian enrollment (both public schools and BIE schools).

• ARRA ‘‘Race to the Top’’ elementary and secondary school reform program. BIEfunded schools were inadvertently omitted from this multi-billion dollar competitive grant program. Sec. 201 of S. 1262 would cure this omission.

• ARRA funding for Early Childhood Education. Sec. 201 of S. 1262 would also 

cure the omission of any mention of a tribal role in the development of early 

childhood programs for which $500 million is now available. The bill’s provision 

would require States to collaborate with tribes to assure that services are provided to Indian children, and authorizes States to make subgrants to tribes. In 

fact, it would be a good idea to amend the provision to give competitive preference points to States that demonstrate they will award subgrants to tribes.

• Tribal Education Policy Advisory Group. Bill Sec. 203 would require the Secretary of the Interior to establish an advisory group comprised of elected tribal 

leaders to advise the Secretary on budget and policy issues affecting the BIE 

school system. It is intended to give elected officials of tribes which host BIE 

schools a greater role in policymaking.

• BIE school budget requests. Bill Sec. 204 requires the Secretary of the Interior 

to reveal in annual budget submissions the amount necessary to sustain BIE 

school academic and residential programs pursuant to the regulations at 25 

CFR Part 39, subpt. H. This regulation has been in effect for several years, but 

the Secretary’s budget requests have not provided the information required by 

the regulation.

• Amendments to the Tribally Controlled Schools Act. Most of the USET tribes 

with BIE schools operate those schools through grants authorized by the TCSA. 

We support the technical amendments to that law, including creation of a mechanism for tribes to amend their TCSA grants.

Puzzling Omission: Proposed amendment to Administrative Cost Grant provision 

for Tribally-operated BIE Schools. We are disappointed that S. 1262 does not contain an important amendment proposed by the tribal organization team that is intended to improve the funding of administrative costs provided to tribes that operate BIE schools. (Administrative cost grants have been renamed ‘‘tribal grant support costs’’ by the BIA budget.) Administrative cost grants have been so chronically 

under-funded that BIE is now providing only 61 percent of the amount required by 

law (25 USC § 2008) to adequately cover the indirect/administrative costs of tribes 

and tribal school boards. 

The tribal organization team recommended that when submitting AC Grant budget requests, the Secretary of the Interior be required to request a separate budget 

to fund the first year AC Grant for schools that newly convert to tribal operation, 

and to include that amount in the subsequent year’s budget for AC Grants. The obVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:29 Apr 06, 2012 Jkt 068388 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\68388.TXT JACK
24

jective of this recommendation is to prevent further reduction in funding for tribes 

that operate BIE schools. Under the current practice, when a new school converts 

to tribal operation, funding to tribes who already operate such schools is reduced 

to provide funding for the new conversions. The United States has an obligation to 

properly fund the administrative/indirect costs of tribes who operate BIA and BIE 

programs. That obligation is being flagrantly violated with regard to tribes who operate BIE schools. 

Thus, we urge the Committee to amend S. 1262 to include the amendment to this 

provision recommended by the tribal organization team. 

Conclusion 

On behalf of the United South and Eastern Tribes, I express gratitude to this 

Committee for the attention it has given to the need to amend Federal education 

laws for the benefit of Indian students and to enhance the authority of Indian tribes 

to have a meaningful role in the education of their children.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Chairman Cromwell. 

Mr. Russell, will you please proceed with your testimony? 

STATEMENT OF SCOTT RUSSELL, ROCKY MOUNTAIN AREA 

VICE PRESIDENT, NATIONAL CONGRESS OF AMERICAN

INDIANS; SECRETARY, CROW NATION 

Mr. RUSSELL. [greeting in native language]. Aloha to you, Mr. 

Chairman. Thank you for having us here today, Senators Murkowski and Barrasso, and a good friend, John Tester, a special 

hello to you and thank you for being here. 

The CHAIRMAN. Aloha. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify 

today. 

My name is Scott Russell. I serve as the Rocky Mountain Area 

Vice President of the National Congress of American Indians. I am 

also the Secretary of the Great Crow Nation of Montana. 

NCAI strongly supports the work of the committee in setting the 

pace for the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. We applaud the committee for its leadership and swift 

movement. I would like to outline for you today two overarching 

goals and briefly discuss strategies that we believe can be used to 

accomplish them. 

The first goal is tribal governments must be able to exercise local 

control over our educational system. Indian nations have the largest stake in improving the education of their citizens. There is no 

more vital resource to the continued existence and integrity of Indian Tribes than their children. They are our most precious resource. We believe the following recommendations will accomplish 

this goal. 

Number one is strengthening the tribal government role in education. Tribes are overwhelmingly supportive of local control over 

education and they are well-positioned to address the educational 

needs of our children. To do so, however, our Tribes and our educational departments must be afforded the same status as state 

education agencies within our lands. 

Number two is consultation with Tribes. The Department of Education must begin consulting directly with tribal governments prior 

to making changes that may affect the education of Indian children 

or adults. This would be best accomplished by adjusting the current 

National Advisory Council on Indian Education from being an advisory committee to becoming a tribal leader committee. 

25

The third goal we have is that all of our students, regardless of 

where they attend school, should be eligible for the same programs 

and services as the general population. The federal trust responsibility for Indian education must be recognized in all education policies. We must have priorities equal to those of other citizens and 

to participate in all programs and services offered within ESEA. 

We believe the following recommendations will accomplish this 

goal. 

First is funding for Bureau of Indian Education schools. You 

need to express statutory language that must be included to make 

funding available for the BIE schools. Without this express language, our BIE school system will be unable to participate or receive much needed funding. A recent example lies in the ineligibility of the BIE to apply for or receive Race to the Top grants. 

Second is collaboration between the Department of Interior and 

the Department of Education. The Secretaries of Education and Interior should collaborate to provide training and technical assistance to the BIE Tribes and schools operated under grants and contracts. We suggest that the collaboration include assistance in curriculum selection, use of alternative assessments for tribal schools 

and instructional practices. 

Last, I would like to discuss the importance of investing in cultural language and revitalization programs. While this issue is 

woven into both those goals, we believe its urgency and importance 

should be singled out. The survival of Native language and culture 

is critical to the success of our communities and our ways of life. 

The existing Native language programs in schools have demonstrated that our schools are more engaged and successful when 

offered the opportunity to study their traditional ways. We believe 

the following recommendations will accomplish this goal. 

Number one is formula grant programs for immersion schools. It 

is largely recognized that the best way to learn a language is to 

fully immerse oneself. However, the key for these programs to work 

is sustainability. It is critically important that our Native language 

programs are provided long term, sustainable funding. 

Second is long term investment in culture-based education. Culture-based education is a teaching model that encourages quality 

instructional practices, rooted in culture and linguistically relevant 

contexts. For Native communities, this includes teaching our language, but also means incorporating traditional cultural characteristics and teaching strategies that are harmonious with Native cultural and contemporary ways of knowing. 

Next is the Path Act. In addition to the ESEA language programs proposed in the bill, I urge this committee to work with our 

Senator, John Tester, from Montana to include the important tribal 

college focus, Native language research and education programs 

which he included in legislation which was introduced in the 111th 

Congress as part of the Path legislation. 

To revitalize our languages, we must work at all levels and it 

takes a community. We have to start from pre-K all the way 

through the college level. 

In conclusion, I would like to offer my comments as well as additional language recommendations for the Native CLASS Act from 

the National Congress of American Indians for the record. Thank 

26

you for inviting me to speak with you today and for making Indian 

children a priority. We look forward to working with this committee in the future in finalizing a bill. 

I would be happy to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Russell follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SCOTT RUSSELL, ROCKY MOUNTAIN AREA VICE PRESIDENT, NATIONAL CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS; SECRETARY, CROW NATION

Good morning, Chairman Akaka, Vice Chairman Barrasso, and members of the 

Committee. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify today. My name is 

Scott Russell. I serve as the Rocky Mountain Area Vice President of the National 

Congress of American Indians (NCAI) and as the Secretary of Crow Nation. 

NCAI is the oldest and largest American Indian organization in the United 

States. As the most representative national Indian organization, we serve the broad 

interests of tribal governments across the nation. NCAI was founded in 1944 in response to termination and assimilation policies. Since then, we have fought to preserve the treaty rights and sovereign status of Indian tribes and to ensure that Indian people may fully participate in the political system. As such, we strongly support the work of the Committee in setting the pace for the reauthorization of the 

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) with the introduction of Senate 

bill 1262, the ‘‘Native Culture, Language, and Access for Success in Schools Act’’. 

We applaud the Committee for its leadership and swift movement. 

Framework for Tribal Sovereignty in ESEA 

I would like to set the tone of our testimony by quoting Wilma Mankiller, former 

Principle Chief of the Cherokee Nation, and life-time advocate for Indian Country:

‘‘I don’t think anybody anywhere can talk about the future of their people without talking about education. Whoever controls the education of our children controls our future.’’

This statement is the central premise for the recommendations that NCAI, and 

our partners, the United South Eastern Tribes and the National Indian Education 

Association, offered to the Committee for the reauthorization of the ESEA. I would 

like to outline for you today our two overarching goals, and briefly discuss strategies 

that we believe can be used to accomplish them. 

Goal 1: Tribal Governments must be able to exercise local control over our

educational system. 

Indian nations have the largest stake in improving the education of their citizens. 

We must prepare them for active and equal participation in the global market. We 

must prepare them to be citizens in the 21st century. We must prepare them to be 

positive, involved members of our communities. And, most importantly, we must 

prepare them to be the future leaders of our governments. There is no more vital 

resource to the continued existence and integrity of Indian tribes than their children. We believe the following recommendations will accomplish this goal:

1. Strengthening Tribal Governments Role in Education. Tribes are overwhelmingly supportive of local control over education, and they are well-positioned to 

address the educational needs of our children. To do so however, our tribes and 

our tribal education departments must be afforded the same status as State 

Education Agencies within our lands.

2. Consultation with Tribes. The government-to-government relationship that 

exists between Indian tribes and the Federal Government is derived from the 

legal status of tribal governments and only occurs between the Federal Government and elected tribal leaders. As such, the Department of Education must 

begin consulting directly with tribal governments, prior to proposing regulation, 

establishing or changing policy, or submitting any budget proposal that may affect the education of Indian children or adults. This would be best accomplished 

by adjusting the current National Advisory Council on Indian Education from 

being an advisory committee to being a tribal leader committee.

Goal 2: All of our students, regardless of where they attend school, should be eligible 

for the same programs and services as the general population. 

Providing education to American Indians and Alaska Natives is a federal obligation because of the unique legal status of Indian people. When Indian tribes ceded 

certain lands—lands which now constitute the United States—agreements were 

27

* The additional language recommendations for the Native CLASS Act have been retained in 

Committee files. 

made between tribes and the United States government that established a ‘‘trust’’ 

responsibility for the safety and well-being of Indian peoples in perpetuity. In addition, a number of treaties specifically outlined the provision of education, nutrition, 

and health care. Therefore, the federal trust responsibility for American Indian and 

Alaska Native education must be recognized in all education policies. 

At the same time, as United States citizens, American Indians and Alaska Natives should have opportunities equal to those of other citizens to participate in the 

benefits of all programs and services offered within the reauthorization. We believe 

the following recommendations will accomplish this goal:

1. Funding for Bureau of Indian Education Schools. Express statutory language 

must be included to make funding available for the Bureau of Indian Education 

(BIE) schools (either overarching the Act or within each ESEA program). Without express statutory language, our BIE school system will be unable to participate or receive much-needed funding. The most recent example of this lies in 

the ineligibility of BIE to apply for or receive ‘‘Race to the Top’’ grants.

2. Collaboration between the Department of the Interior and the Department of 

Education. The Secretary of Education should collaborate with the Secretary of 

Interior to provide training and technical assistance to the BIE, tribes, and 

schools operated under grants and contracts from the BIE. We suggest that the 

collaboration include assistance in curriculum selection, use of alternative assessments for tribal schools, and instructional practices.

Investment in Cultural and Language Revitalization 

Lastly, I would like to discuss the importance of investing in cultural and language revitalization programs. While this issue could easily be, and is, woven into 

our two goals above, we believe its urgency and importance should be singled out. 

The survival of Native language and culture is critical to the success of our communities and ways of life. Existing Native language programs and schools have 

demonstrated that our students are more engaged and successful when offered the 

opportunity to study their traditional ways. Additionally, these programs are proven 

to be a protective factor for youth exposed to violence. To that end, tribes believe 

that the ESEA reauthorization should support an investment in Native cultural and 

language revitalization. We believe the following recommendations will accomplish 

this goal:

1. Formula Grant Programs for Immersion Schools. It is largely recognized that 

the best way to learn a language is to fully immerse oneself. While we have 

limited statistical data showing that Native language instruction directly improves academic success, there is a large body of qualitative data that shows 

correlation of Native language instruction to factors that do improve academic 

success. Therefore it is critically important to have sustainable funding for research that will demonstrate this statistical correlation.

2. Long Term Investment in Cultural Based Education. By definition, Cultural 

Based Education (CBE) is a teaching model that encourages quality instructional practices rooted in cultural and linguistically relevant context. For Native 

communities, this includes teaching our Native language, but it also means incorporating traditional cultural characteristics and teaching strategies that are 

harmonious with Native cultural and contemporary ways of knowing. We know 

that our students perform better academically when they have a sense of pride 

and self-esteem, and CBE provides this vital foundation.

Conclusion 

I would like to offer my comments, as well additional language recommendations 

for the Native CLASS Act from NCAI for the record. * 

Thank you for inviting me to speak with you today; and thank you for making 

Indian children a priority. We look forward to working with the Committee in the 

following weeks to finalize a bill. I will be happy to answer any questions that you 

may have.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Russell, for your testimony. 

Ms. Bowers, will you please proceed with your testimony? 

28

STATEMENT OF AMY BOWERS, STAFF ATTORNEY, NATIVE 

AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND 

Ms. BOWERS. [greeting in native language]. 

Good afternoon, Chairman and Members of the Committee. 

Thank you for inviting me to testify on S. 1262, the Native CLASS 

Act. 

My name is Amy Bowers and I am staff attorney at the Native 

American Rights Fund. I am also a member of the Yurok Tribe and 

I represent the Tribal Education Departments National Assembly. 

First, I would like to unequivocally thank the Committee for this 

bill. NARF and TEDNA are greatly appreciative of it and we support it. Its excellence reflects that the committee has really listened 

to Indian country. It incorporates very well so many of the key recommendations that TEDNA, other Indian organizations and major 

reports have urged. The bill’s provisions regarding tribal access, 

tribal education agencies, TEAs, and cooperative agreements, all of 

which my testimony will address, are indeed unprecedented. 

Currently, over 93 percent of K–12 Native American students attend public schools on and off Indian lands. There are 740 elementary and secondary public schools in this country located on Indian 

lands. Many of these schools have a student population that is predominantly Native American and in a high number of these 

schools, the population is overwhelmingly Native American. 

As you mentioned earlier, Mr. Chairman, our students aren’t performing well in these schools and they are dropping out at a higher 

rate than any other student group. The high drop out rate is linked 

to unemployment, drug and alcohol issues, teen pregnancies and 

other major social issues. Previous reauthorizations of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act have tried to address these problems, but they have nonetheless, persisted. 

The many stakeholders who collaborated on this bill knew this 

and they knew that a new approach was called for, one that firmly 

recognizes and supports the role of tribal governments as 

sovereigns in addressing these problems. Are Tribes ready for this? 

Yes, they are ready and they have the capacity to be leading education agencies. 

Tribes with TEAs and education programs have improved 

schools, they have improved student performance and community 

relations. To continue this success, TEAs and Tribes need federal 

law support like the Native CLASS Act. Otherwise, Federal law 

will continue to exclude tribal governments in education, leaving 

TEA efforts unsupported and Tribes with little to no real control 

over the systems that teach the majority of their members. 

Notably, even with little true support in federal law, many 

Tribes have created TEAs and developed their capacities. Some 

Tribes are already performing local education agency, LEA and 

state education agency, SEA, functions without federal funding or 

authorizations. Some TEAs already do voluntarily what federal law 

requires and funds SEAs to do. 

In recognition of tribal government contributions, several States 

have already enacted specific laws acknowledging roles and responsibilities for tribal governments and public schools. The Federal 

Government provides billions of dollars annually to LEAs and 

29

SEAs but hardly any funding to TEDs and tribal governments for 

education. 

The enormous missed opportunity to invest in TEAs and Tribes 

for the sake of Native students must be seized. S. 1262 does this. 

It aligns federal law with what is already happening and with 

what needs to happen. It carefully allocates new funding and authorizations between high capacity TEAs and developing capacity 

TEAs. This sound structure supports TEAs of all abilities and 

Tribes of all sizes in their efforts to contribute at appropriate levels 

to Native American student success. 

S. 1262 has new funding authorizations for Native American students. The new money will increase local control of education by 

bringing tribal governments, tribal communities and Indian parents into the schools. It will increase communication and collaboration amongst Tribes, LEAs and SEAs. It will empower TEAs to 

take the lead in developing culturally relevant curricula, teacher 

training and implementing tribal education goals and policies. The 

results will be an education system supported and directed by the 

community with rigorous academic standards based in tribal language and culture. 

A final note regarding S. 1262’s important and innovative TEA 

Pilot Project. This project allows up to five Tribes to apply to the 

Department of Education to perform SEA functions and receive 

funding to support those activities in public schools on their lands. 

The Tribes are very excited about this project because it is a monumental step in achieving tribal sovereignty in education. It enables 

them to direct and control education on their reservation by performing high level SEA functions. These are core components of 

education of which tribal assumption has never before been expressly supported by federal law. 

In conclusion, NARF and TEDNA support this bill and we look 

forward to continuing to work closely with our partners to refine 

the bill. For example, we recommend ensuring that both authorizations for funding for tribal education agencies are at the level of 

$25 million and clarifying that all Tribes have equal access to 

much needed tribal member student data. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Bowers follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF AMY BOWERS, STAFF ATTORNEY, NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS

FUND

Good afternoon, Chairman, Vice Chairman, and members of the Committee. 

Thank you for inviting me to testify on S. 1262, the Native CLASS Act. My name 

is Amy Bowers. I am a staff attorney at the Native American Rights Fund (NARF). 

I am also a member of the Yurok Tribe of Northern California. I represent the Tribal Education Departments National Assembly (TEDNA), a non-profit organization 

for tribal education departments and agencies nationwide. 

I’d first like to unequivocally thank the Committee for this bill. NARF and 

TEDNA are greatly appreciative of it and we support it. Its excellence reflects that 

the Committee has really listened to Indian country. It incorporates very well many 

of the key recommendations that TEDNA, other Indian organizations and major reports have urged—elevation of the role of tribal governments in education, meaningful support of tribal education agencies (TEAs), and clear provisions for partnerships 

among other education entities and tribes. The bill’s provisions regarding tribal access, TEAs, and cooperative agreements, all of which my testimony will address, are 

indeed unprecedented. 

30

Currently over 93 percent of K–12 Native American students attend public schools 

on and off Indian lands. There are 740 elementary and secondary public schools in 

this country located on Indian lands. Many of these schools have student populations that are predominately Native American, and in a high number of these 

schools the population is overwhelmingly (80–90 percent +) Native American. 

But, nationwide, Native American students perform lower on standardized tests 

than any other student group. The national Native American student high school 

dropout rate is over 65 percent, which is higher than any other group. The high 

dropout rate is linked to unemployment, drug and alcohol abuse, teen pregnancies, 

and other social issues. Previous reauthorizations of the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act have tried to address these matters, but the problems have persisted. 

The many stakeholders who collaborated on S. 1262 knew this, and knew that a 

new approach was called for—one that firmly recognizes and supports the role of 

tribal governments as sovereigns in addressing these problems. 

Many of us have been immersed in this bill but for those who haven’t, they may 

be unfamiliar with the need for this innovation in federal education law. Simply put, 

tribal governments and TEAs must be empowered to become true partners with the 

states and schools in education. This bill is major first step in accomplishing this 

goal. 

Are tribes ready for this? Yes. They are ready and have the capacity to be leading 

agencies in education. TEAs can operate federal education programs. They can perform roles and activities of local education agencies (LEAs) and state education 

agencies (SEAs). Tribes with TEAs and education programs have improved schools, 

student performance, and community relations. To continue this success, TEAs need 

federal law support like S. 1262. Otherwise, federal law will continue to exclude 

tribes as governments in education; leaving TEA efforts unsupported and tribes 

with little to no real control over the systems that teach the majority of their members. This discourages tribal-state-school partnerships or even communication in 

education and ultimately, hurts Native American students. 

Notably, even with little to no true support in federal law, many tribes to date 

have created TEAs and developed their capacities. Some tribes are performing LEA 

and SEA functions—without federal funding or authorization. In short, some TEAs 

already voluntarily do what federal law requires and funds SEAs to do. Other tribes 

have fostered cooperative agreements with LEAs and SEAs in education. Moreover, 

in recognition of tribal government contributions several states recently have enacted laws specifically acknowledging roles and responsibilities for tribal governments in public schools. 

Through the now well-established federal policies of Indian self-determination, 

tribal self-governance, and economic development tribes have vastly increased their 

governance, managerial and technical capacities and resources. Tribes operate their 

own health clinics, provide social services, and manage a variety of natural resources. In these areas tribes typically receive federal funding and must comply 

with applicable reporting and accountability requirements. It is time to include education among the vital services provided and resources managed by tribes. 

The Federal Government provides billions of dollars annually to SEAs and LEAs, 

but hardly any funding to TEAs and tribal governments for education. The enormous missed opportunity to invest in TEAs and tribes, for the sake of Native American students must be seized. S. 1262 does this. It aligns federal law with what is 

already happening and with what needs to happen. S. 1262 carefully allocates new 

funding and authorizations between already high capacity TEAs and developing capacity TEAs. This sound structure supports TEAs of all abilities and tribes of all 

sizes in their efforts to contribute at appropriate levels to Native American student 

success. 

Will SEAs and LEAs see ‘‘reduced’’ funding under S. 1262? The bill allows for 

some shifts at the Secretary of Education’s discretion, to tribes and TEAs in limited 

instances. Such shifts of course do not divert any funding from students served. In 

this sense, S. 1262 puts education funding on a par with many other pots of federal 

money that tribes and states share such as Temporary Assistance to Needy Families 

or environmental resources management funding. As in these areas, adding tribes 

as eligible grantees will improve programs and service delivery at the local level. 

Conversely, continuing to leave out tribes will likely maintain the status quo, including Native American students’ persistent high dropout rates and low academic 

performance. 

Additionally, S. 1262 has new funding authorizations for Native American students. The new money will increase local control of education by bringing tribal governments, tribal communities, and Indian parents into the schools. It will increase 

communication and collaboration among tribes, LEAs, and SEAs. It will empower 

TEAs to take the lead in developing culturally relevant curriculum, teacher training, 

31

and tribal education goals and policies. The result will be education systems with 

rigorous academic standards and tribal language and culture supported and directed 

by the community. To date none of this has been adequately or coherently addressed 

in federal law or authorized appropriations. 

Does S. 1262 increase ‘‘bureaucracy’’? Not really; in fact, proper recognition of the 

role of tribal governments and TEAs in education could result in decreased bureaucracy. Indian education is already fragmented among states, LEAs, federal, and tribal entities administering different systems and a host of federal programs. As Congress has recognized since the 1988 and 1994 TEA appropriation authorizations, 

TEAs are uniquely best situated to coordinate all of these various systems and programs and track Native American students through the myriad of services and providers. Ideally, in the long-term TEAs will serve as the primary education agency 

for many Native American students. This will reduce state and federal bureaucracy 

and maximize the amount of money and services to Native American students. 

A final comment regarding S. 1262’s important and innovative TEA pilot project. 

The project allows up to five tribes to apply to the Department of Education to perform SEA functions and receive funding to support the activities in a public school 

located on the tribe’s land that has a majority of Native American students. Tribes 

are very excited about this project because it represents a monumental step for tribal sovereignty. It enables them to direct and control education on their reservation 

by performing high-level SEA functions including training teachers, setting accreditation and assessment standards, assisting low performing schools, tracking student 

data, and setting policies. These are core components of education, of which tribal 

assumption has never before been supported expressly by federal law. 

In conclusion, NARF and TEDNA support S. 1262. We have come this far in partnership with the Committee and we look forward to continuing to work closely with 

our partners to refine the bill. For example, we recommend ensuring that both TEA 

authorizations appropriations amounts are at the level of $25 million and clarifying 

that all tribes have equal access to much needed tribal member student data. We 

are happy to help address any concerns or questions regarding S. 1262, and to ultimately see it through the legislative process and become law. Thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee today.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Ms. Bowers, for your testimony. 

Again, I want to defer to Senator Tester for his questions at this 

time. 

Senator TESTER. Again, I thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome to all three of the witnesses. I notice each one of you 

addressed us in your Native tongue. All three languages were 

unique because I think Tribes are unique. 

This question is for Scott Russell and if either of the others 

would like to jump in, you sure may. 

Since every language is a bit different and the fact that I think 

we all realize the importance of language and the revitalization of 

languages, is there a standard curriculum out there that the public 

schools or the BIE schools could use to implement language classes? 

Mr. RUSSELL. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

The answer is yes and no. There are laws in place in Montana. 

Indian education for all was established in Montana in 1972. There 

was a law but there was no enforcement or funding for over 33 

years until you became part of the picture when you were in the 

Senate in the State of Montana. Only then was this law funded, 

but to this date, we still do not see more enforcement. 

A lot of these things turned into law and lacking support for 33 

years, this generation is feeling the effect of that. I use myself as 

an example. My first language was Crow. In Head Start, 100 percent of the students spoke the Crow language. We just did a recent 

study and there are only three students that spoke the Crow language coming into Head Start now. 

32

If you look at the harsh reality of that situation and now you 

think about what is working. We have a Senator sitting here that 

the State has led in immersion school, Senator Akaka from the 

State of Hawaii has an immersion school. There is no one way to 

fix this, but I don’t see it as a problem. I see it as a great opportunity for all of us to come together. One solution is not going to 

work for everyone, but we have to keep trying and we have to have 

long term, sustainable funding for all these projects. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you. Go ahead if you want to address 

that. 

Mr. CROMWELL. When we look at the Mashpee Tribe’s first encounter with the European settlers, 400 plus years, and almost decimation of my people’s culture and language. We still are on our 

original land standing strong. 

Within our service delivery areas, there are no programs in the 

public schools that teach immersion camps. You might have heard 

of the Genius Award. Our Tribe was awarded that Genius Award 

for $500,000 through Jessie Little Doe Baird who is a tribal member. She is a MIT graduate. 

We have immersion camps in three of our service delivery areas 

that we fund. Our language is stronger than ever. People are 

speaking it, talking it. It is a very ancient language. The first Bible 

was written in our language at Harvard through John Printer who 

is a Wampanoag. 

Our language is revived. We have done it ourselves. It would be 

great to have funding through this new Senate bill, S. 1262, to ensure that within our service delivery areas where we have these 

huge populations of Mashpee Wampanoags to be able to provide 

that support. Currently, today, we fund it. It is stronger than ever. 

We have camps and programs and we do it ourselves. 

Senator TESTER. Teacher recruitment, training, retention was 

talked about in the previous panel. I know it is important to you. 

How do we do it? How do we improve recruitment, retention and 

training? 

Ms. BOWERS. Thank you for the question. 

I think the best model out there right now is the ‘‘Grow Your 

Own’’ model. The thing that is important to understand is several 

Native communities are incredibly rural and they come with their 

own unique set of issues and opportunities but a lot of those communities aren’t going to have a Starbucks, they are not going to 

have a Macy’s, so some teachers don’t want to be in that kind of 

rural community and they don’t understand the way the community functions and works. Each tribal community, in addition to 

that, has its own way of creating consensus and government that 

is based in the tribal process. 

In the ‘‘Grow Your Own’’ model, that supports tribal communities 

developing their own teachers, growing their own teachers. That 

teacher may have to leave the reservation in order to obtain the 

education knowing there is a place for them when they come back 

and having those people come from that community will make 

them want to come back. 

Another point I wanted to add is several state laws are authorizing tribal and state partnerships to develop teacher credentials 

and that kind of thing in Native languages. I think that is a really 

33

good model to support because that allows people who have the expertise in the tribal community to be recognized by making sure 

the credential process acknowledges those unique cultural skills 

that particular person has. 

Senator TESTER. I want to thank you all. The time has run out 

but I want to thank you all for being here as with the previous 

panel and the next panel. I think if we are going to get our arms 

around this, we all need to work together. 

Thank you all for being here. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, very much, Senator Tester, for your 

questions. 

Chairman Cromwell, you mentioned in your testimony some eligible local education agencies do not apply for Title VII grant funds 

to support Native education. Why do you think they aren’t applying 

for these funds? How can we encourage them to do so? 

Mr. CROMWELL. That is a great question, Mr. Chairman. 

I went to one of our service delivery areas. I was doing educational advocacy for about 10 years and recently one of my nephews was having a problem, so we did an education evaluation on 

the executive skills, the kinesthetic skills, auditory skills, all the 

different components of assessing what a child’s learning problems 

are. As you know, with Native children, it is kinesthetic object oriented. 

I had to push that school for an IEP to specifically focus on these 

skills. I have been at this for 10 years, it is not my claim to fame. 

I am a technologist and a finance person, but I really got deep into 

education. 

Then I looked at the school system and said you have a fiduciary 

responsibility for our Native children to provide the best in educational services. I said, it is Title VII, Indian education. Over the 

Mashpee school system, it is $40K which is egregious in a sense 

where the ability to provide those specific services needed to move 

our children through the system. 

They looked at me and said, what are you talking about? Right 

then I understood immediately that they are completely unaware 

of that being the school systems around these Title VII monies that 

should follow our children in the school system and provide the 

services that are rightfully needed. 

They began to ask me a lot of questions about what does it mean, 

how do we get it. I was supposed to meet with the superintendent 

and they keep canceling and changing the meeting, but it is foreign 

to them, especially in the northeast. It is very foreign to them, they 

don’t understand, they don’t get it, so it is like you almost have to 

run a campaign around these needs that are important to Indian 

children, the fact that they should be hiring Native teachers and 

building that experience for our children. 

So that is one of my points I am really pushing and stressing in 

Massachusetts, making my way around the school systems. They 

are excited to talk about it but they just don’t know and understand and it hasn’t been promoted to them. I think as a federallyrecognized Tribe within the State, there is a trust responsibility 

not only on the Tribe but also on the Federal Government to communicate with the school systems and say, here is funding, it is 

available. 

34

In many cases, the funding is not available by the time these 

schools try to go after it because that pot is empty. We have challenges. I think it is a marketing and communications opportunity 

for the Federal Government to speak to these schools where federally-recognized Tribes are located that depend on the public school 

systems. We submit our statistics and work with them. The Department of Education should be involved in this. 

For us in Massachusetts, while we have been there forever, 

fought in the Revolutionary War and helped build the State, the 

first Indian governing town in America, they just still don’t get it. 

They don’t understand. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for that. 

Mr. Russell, the majority of students on the Crow Reservation attend public schools located at the reservation. Can you tell us 

about the relationship between the Tribe and the State and whether the Tribe has significant input into the education of its students? 

Mr. RUSSELL. As Senator Tester and my colleague alluded to, we 

have a Native American, a Blackfeet tribal member who is the Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Montana, Denise 

Juneau who has been very helpful because she has actually been 

through all this and actually known a lot of the hardships that we 

face as Native communities in Montana. 

One of the border towns on my reservation has 75 percent Crow 

Indian. Just recently, my nephew was able to speak before his 

graduating class and he spoke in the Crow language, and offered 

praise and thanks to all those who were there. During a school 

board meeting, one of the school board members, who is non-Indian, saw this as rude. Things like that, you think about some of 

those things that maybe they are resisting us, maybe they are part 

of the problem. I don’t know. 

When you think about the relationships we have, we contribute 

to the society. We think about how we can help our children gain 

prominence in contemporary society. We still think about who we 

are. I am proud of who I am and we perpetuate our way of life, 

our language, our culture in a way that promotes pride. 

For our children, that is how all our work is going to be evident. 

Quite frankly, Mr. Chairman, it scares me right now when most of 

our children do not speak our language. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for your responses. 

Ms. Bowers, in your testimony, you focused on being able to 

make sure Tribes have access to help their students who are in 

public schools either on or off the reservations. What tools for 

Tribes are most important in dealing with their local and state 

agencies? 

Ms. BOWERS. Thank you for that question. 

It is appropriate for federal law to create a venue for Tribes and 

States to communicate about how to improve Indian education performance, so for example, the cooperative agreements authorizations in the Native CLASS Act, just having a federal authorization 

or a cooperative agreement between a Tribe and a State, that cooperative agreement can regard anything, which is the beauty of that 

particular provision in that bill because no matter what the community needs to do to help their Native kids, that cooperative 

35

agreement will help facilitate the Tribe getting involved in that 

process. 

It is like Chairman Cromwell mentioned. The school that is serving the Mashpee kids don’t even know about Title VII. What they 

could do is use that cooperative agreement process to inform the 

local education agency about Title VII, inform the LEA about other 

tribal education programs they can offer and they can enter into 

that agreement that can outline how the federal services, the tribal 

services, as well as the state services, can be co-mingled together 

to better improve the programs that serve our kids. 

A lot of times what we hear from both the Tribes and the States 

is that they want to get together but just don’t have a vehicle to 

do it. Beyond, the vehicle, the other thing is funding. You can have 

the best idea and I think a lot of our tribal leaders have these awesome ideas for education but they don’t have any funding to actually implement those ideas. 

Even if, for example, you had a state partner who was ready to 

implement a particular tribal program in a public school, if there 

is no funding, the idea goes no where. That is also why we like this 

bill because it authorizes new funding for language and culture, 

teacher training, so on and so forth. That will help the Tribes and 

States create these partnerships and empower them to develop new 

programs that will better meet the needs of our children. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you so much for that response. 

What we see happening and what we hope will continue to happen is that you find new and better ways to try to assist the way 

you want to structure your education. Again, we want it to be as 

local as possible so they are more aware of their culture and the 

traditions. That part of education, I think, is so important. 

I have other questions here for you that I will submit to the 

record and you can respond to them. I want to thank you so much 

for coming because your responses have been valuable to us. Hopefully what we are trying to do will be a fruit and will blossom into 

beautiful flowers, trees and fruits for our young people. 

As was mentioned, we do this for our young people. I would like 

to see in the future that our young people can still speak the language and know with pride what their culture is. That is our goal. 

That is all of our goals, so let us continue to work together on this. 

Thank you very much. 

I would like to call on Panel Three to come forward. I would like 

to invite you to the witness table. Serving on our third panel is Ms. 

Dana Brave Eagle from the Oglala Sioux Tribal Education Department located in Kyle, South Dakota, and Ms. Jessica Imotichey, 

Senior Policy Analyst with the Chickasaw Nation from Washington, D.C. Welcome to you. 

Ms. Brave Eagle, will you please proceed with your testimony? 

STATEMENT OF DANA BRAVE EAGLE, DIRECTOR, OGLALA 

SIOUX TRIBAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, PINE RIDGE

INDIAN RESERVATION 

Ms. BRAVE EAGLE. [greeting in native language]. My name is 

Dana Brave Eagle and I am the Oglala Sioux Tribal Education Director representing the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation today. 

36

I want to thank Senator Johnson’s office for the invitation to be 

here to share testimony with the committee on Indian education. 

I represent a reservation with over 5,000 school age children 

from K–12. We also have a local tribal college, Oglala Lakota College servicing our reservation with 13 centers on our reservation. 

On our reservation, we also have four State elementary schools 

within our boundaries. We are a large reservation, land-based. Of 

the 13 schools, we have 6 tribal schools, 1 BIA school, 2 parochial 

schools and 4 State Shannon County schools. 

This provides a challenge for us because we are not able to provide clear data on all our children because of the different entities. 

We want to come to the table and work together with the State, 

with the Bureau as tribal schools working together, providing a 

true picture of our students on our reservation. 

I think one of our struggles has been data driven. We don’t have 

the data to represent our children. We don’t have research-based 

curricula—no one does—of our children, the Oglalas. There hasn’t 

been research to prove which curriculum is best suited for our children. We have people who make those decisions that are not on our 

reservation or who have worked with our children. We need to be 

at the table now. It is time for the Tribes to be at the table to help 

make these decisions because at the end of the day, these are our 

children, this is our future and we do now have the resources. We 

have the individuals who are educated and able to make these decisions. 

When we talk about the Lakota language, our language and culture, we need to work on preserving it. This bill moves this forward. I truly believe and I am very passionate about education. I 

have spent 23 years in Indian country in Indian education. How do 

our children know where they are going if they don’t know where 

they have been? If we don’t build our culture and our language, 

then where will we be? It is very important that we maintain our 

culture and our language but with self-determination. It is very important that we involve the Tribes and that Tribes are involved in 

making decisions on their education. 

I want to say thank you again and applaud this committee for 

addressing Native issues and the future of Native children. I want 

to continue work together and believe this Act will not only benefit 

Native American students, but will also have a positive influence 

on their environment. I want you to know that I will continue to 

work with this Committee, with other partners and our State to 

continue these efforts. 

Again, [greeting in native language] to you, Chairman Akaka 

and to Senator Johnson for the invitation allowing me to be here. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Brave Eagle follows:]

37

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DANA BRAVE EAGLE, DIRECTOR, OGLALA SIOUX TRIBAL

EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, PINE RIDGE INDIAN RESERVATION


630a1.eps
38

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for your testimony. 

Ms. Imotichey, your testimony, please. 

STATEMENT OF JESSICA IMOTICHEY, SENIOR POLICY 

ANALYST, CHICKASAW NATION 

Ms. IMOTICHEY. [greeting in native language]. My name is Jessica Imotichey, I am Chickasaw, and I am the Senior Policy Analyst for the Chickasaw Nation. Thank you for the opportunity to 

comment today. 

I will be providing testimony on behalf of the Lisa John, our 

Education Administrator, who regretfully was unable to attend. 


630a2.eps
39

The Chickasaw Nation is located in south central Oklahoma and 

encompasses all or part of 13 counties. The majority of our students attend public schools. Currently, there are an estimated 

60,000 students enrolled in public schools within our tribal jurisdiction and approximately 15,000 of those are Native American. The 

goal of the Chickasaw Nation is to develop programs and services 

that enhance the overall quality of life for Chickasaw people and 

this very much includes education. 

We realize that education provides the stepping stones to success 

for our people and for that reason, we embrace the idea of becoming a partner with our local schools. The Tribe operates the Johnson-O’Malley Program for 52 schools within our tribal boundaries. 

This program provides for approximately 8,000 Native students, assisting in things like school supplies, education materials, tutoring 

and cultural education. In 1994, the Johnson-O’Malley student 

count was frozen and funding has not increased since 1995, resulting in fewer services for our students. 

There has been continued movement by the Bureau of Indian 

Education to eliminate the JOM Program. The BIE’s core priorities 

are students located within BIE-funded schools. However, Native 

students in public schools do not have a voice. The best advocates 

for these students are the Tribes themselves. 

Tribal interaction with schools could be improved by allowing the 

tribal education agencies direct access to our students and their 

educational data. Connecting students and families to tribal programs gives much needed access to family counseling, behavioral 

health, mentoring and cultural and language programs. These programs are particularly vital for our at risk students. 

Schools could also be held more accountable for the education of 

our students if funding for Indian education programs was administered by these tribal education agencies. Funds for these programs are often spent on educational services for the entire school 

population and not the Native students for which the funds are allocated. With TEA oversight, we could ensure proper expenditures. 

Finally, culture, history and language make us who we are; it 

permeates everything that we do. Native students look at their history and culture to validate who they are as people. Tribes can be 

a resource for developing culturally appropriate curricula and it 

can be designed so that it will abide by the States’ common core 

standards. 

The No Child Left Behind Act requires a teacher to be considered 

highly qualified in order to teach a language for school credit. Most 

of our fluent speakers are elders and do not have a degree or certification to become highly qualified. Tribes are the best judges to 

say who is an expert speaker of their language. Therefore, it is critical to allow Tribes to certify our own language speakers according 

to our own standards. 

We applaud the efforts of this committee to address issues related to Native education. As I complete my testimony today, I 

would like to pay respect in honoring my Auntie Yvonne Imotichey 

Albertson who received a Masters Degree in Education from Southeastern Oklahoma State University. 

At the time of her passing in 2004, she was the only Chickasaw 

language certified teacher in the State of Oklahoma. She began 

40

teaching Chickasaw at the elementary school in Tishomingo in 

1966. As I testify today, I would like to thank my Auntie and others who have paved the road for what this bill means in recognizing the importance of tribal language and culture in our children’s education. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Imotichey follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JESSICA IMOTICHEY, SENIOR POLICY ANALYST, CHICKASAW

NATION

Good afternoon, I am Jessica Imotichey, Senior Policy Analyst, representing the 

Chickasaw Nation from Oklahoma. Thank you Senator Akaka and the Committee 

for allowing me this opportunity to provide the Chickasaw Nation’s conceptual comments as it pertains to portions of the Native CLASS Act. We are at this time continuing our review of the Act and look forward to more dialogue in the future. 

The Chickasaw Nation is a federally recognized tribe located in south-central 

Oklahoma and encompasses all or parts of 13 counties. The Chickasaw Nation division of education serves approximately 14,200 students per year from across the 

United States. The majority of our Chickasaw students in Oklahoma attend public 

schools. Currently there are an estimated 59,474 students enrolled in the public 

school districts within the tribe’s jurisdiction; 14,801 are Native American. 

The Chickasaw Nation constitution provides the Governor with broad discretion 

to develop and guide the division of education. The division of education is compromised of 210 employees and 5 departments: childcare, head start/early childhood; 

education services; supportive programs and vocational rehabilitation. Our goal at 

the Chickasaw Nation is to develop programs and service that enhance the overall 

quality of life of Chickasaw people. Our services and programs are not limited to 

Chickasaw citizens. We have a wide range of services that benefit other Native 

American’s and non-Natives as well. Many of our programs rely heavily on outside 

partners in order to address the needs of our people and local communities. We realize that education provides a stepping stone for people to become productive citizens. For that reason, we embrace the idea of becoming better partners with our 

local schools to improve the education for all students. 

Johnson O’Malley 

The Chickasaw Nation acts as a contractor for the Johnson O’Malley (JOM) program for 52 public schools within the Chickasaw Nation boundaries. This funding 

provides supplemental educational opportunities for approximately 8,200 Native 

American students in our area assisting with school supplies, educational materials, 

tutoring and cultural education. Each school has a JOM coordinator and parent 

committee that oversees the use of the funds. 

In 1994 the Johnson O’Malley student count was frozen and the funding has not 

increased since 1995. Currently over 90 percent of Native American students are in 

public schools yet the funding has remained the same, resulting in fewer services 

for the students. Additionally when the student count was frozen, the JOM funds 

were placed under the Tribal Priority Allocation (TPA) category of funding and the 

JOM office at the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) was closed. There is no contact 

person for the JOM program to maintain and administer the program. There has 

also been a move by the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) to eliminate the JOM 

program so they can use the funds for other uses. The BIE’s priority is students 

located within BIE funded schools. As I mentioned earlier, most Native American 

students attend public schools. The Native students in public schools do not have 

a voice in the BIE or BIA to advocate for their academic success. The best advocate 

for Native students is the tribes. 

Tribal Interaction with Schools 

Tribal interaction with schools could be improved by allowing Tribal Education 

Agencies (TEA) access to students, and educational data of students enrolled in public schools within the tribal boundaries. These TEAs could assign representatives to 

the schools to have direct contact with the students and could assist them with tutoring and help address attendance issues with an emphasis on access to tribal programs. Connecting students and families to tribal programs gives much needed access to family counseling, behavioral health professionals, mentoring programs, cultural and language programs to name a few. There are too many issues in public 

schools to expect the teachers or administrative staff to be aware of tribal programs, 

41

which results in tribal students being disconnected to services that could help them 

perform better academically and socially. Tribal representatives should have access 

to student records (attendance, grades, etc.) so that tribes can become partners with 

the schools to improve the tribal student’s education, or prevent at-risk students 

from failing or dropping out of school. 

The curricula for public schools are determined by committees appointed at the 

district and state level. Unfortunately, in states with populations of Native American students, there are times when schools include offensive material into curricula 

without being aware of the nature of the offense. For example, in Oklahoma, public 

schools often conduct activities portraying the ‘‘Oklahoma Land Run’’ without realizing the negative connotation of the act to Native American students. Most teachers and administrators are not aware of the negative impact they have on the students and their families. There are better ways to study historical periods of statehood or other events, and with a tribal representative on the curricula committee, 

it could be accomplished in a manner that is not offensive. 

Accountability 

Schools could be held more accountable for the education of Native American students if funding for Indian Education programs such Title VII and Impact Aid were 

administered by the Tribal Education Agencies in the area. This could be done in 

a manner similar to the JOM contracts. Currently, schools are only required to have 

public hearings or oversight committees appointed by the school administration. 

Tribes are often not given adequate notification for the hearings and may not be 

asked to participate at all. As a result the funds are often spent for educational 

services for the entire school population, not the Native American students for 

which the funds are allocated. If the TEA had oversight, it could ensure proper expenditures. For years tribes have been asking local schools how the Title VII and 

Impact Aid funds are spent. Schools are reluctant to share the information with the 

tribes but when they do answer their typical response is ‘‘the funds go into one pool 

and cannot be tracked;’’ they cannot tell us specifically if the funds were spent on 

Native students. Realistically we know the funds are federal dollars and must be 

reported to the funding agency so there is some type of reporting mechanism involved. 

Culture and Native Language 

Over the past decades, tribes have made great advances in capturing and preserving their culture, history and languages. Culture, history and language make 

us who we are and help us to understand our struggles and accomplishments. It 

is unfortunate that the public school textbooks have not preserved this information 

or portrayed accurate Native American history to students. History and culture validates people’s existence. Native students look to their history and culture to validate 

who they are and why they are here. Working with public schools, tribes can provide accurate and relevant history and culture so all students can benefit from the 

information and presentation. Tribes can be a resource for language, cultural or history curricula, and it can be designed so that it will abide by State’s Common CORE 

Standards. 

The No Child Left Behind Act requires a teacher be considered ‘‘highly qualified’’ 

in order to teach a language for school credit. Most fluent tribal speakers are elders 

and do not have the degree or certification to become ‘‘highly qualified.’’ Those same 

speakers are being lost at an alarming rate due to their age. Native languages are 

highly endangered and action needs to be taken before they are lost. The tribes are 

the best judge to say who is an expert speaker of their language. NCLB should include language which allows tribes to certify their language speakers according to 

standards the tribe determines. Additionally, Native language should be certified as 

a world language credit so that it is accredited for purposes of graduation. Currently, Native language is counted as electives due to the challenges of teacher certification. 

In conclusion, we applaud the efforts of this Committee to address issues related 

to Native students and education. Working together, we believe the impact of this 

Act will not only benefit Native American students but will also positively impact 

their families, communities, and all students in public schools!

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for your testimony. 

Ms. Brave Eagle, I want to thank you so much for taking the 

time to come and appear at our hearing. I understand you left your 

family on vacation to come and testify on this bill. 

Ms. BRAVE EAGLE. Yes, I did. 

42

The CHAIRMAN. As you mentioned, and it shows, that you are 

very passionate about this area we are discussing. Let me ask you, 

the Oglala Sioux Tribe has a variety of schools on its reservation, 

public, BIE operated schools, private and tribally-controlled BIE 

schools as well. My question is, how do you coordinate language 

and cultural education among these different schools on the reservations? 

Ms. BRAVE EAGLE. Our tribal schools all have implemented a 

curriculum of Lakota language. Our high schools require our students who are graduating to have Lakota language as a credit and 

requirement to graduate high school. Our BIE school also implements Lakota language. Our parochial schools have some of the 

history and culture and also the language but we don’t have one 

uniform curriculum that is served in all four different types of 

schools. 

In our state schools, Shannon County schools, they do implement 

Lakota language. It is not as prevalent in some of the schools as 

it is in the tribal schools because as the tribal education director, 

we have influence directly to our tribal schools. With the other 

schools, we have to partner with the other entities of the state education agency or the Bureau of Indian Affairs and with the parochial schools. That is a big challenge for us on our reservation. 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Imotichey, the Native CLASS Act seeks to 

improve coordination for federal Native education programs including Johnson-O’Malley and Title VII. What are the coordination 

challenges with federally-funded Native education programs and 

how can we improve that coordination? 

Ms. IMOTICHEY. That is one of the things we are very excited 

about with this bill, improving coordination. One of the biggest 

challenges is what I and some of the others have said in our testimony and that is access to data and being able to really see what 

is going on with our children and what their needs are to better 

be able to serve them. I think by allowing us access to that data, 

we will be able to improve the coordination. 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Brave Eagle, one issue many Tribes deal 

with is the high drop out rate for Native students. A success or failure in school depends on community and parental involvement at 

home and in the schools. We, in Congress, struggle with how to legislate on these issues. Is this an issue in the schools on the Oglala 

Sioux Reservation and how do you think the Tribe and Congress 

can address these issues? 

Ms. BRAVE EAGLE. Yes, this is a major problem for us, our high 

drop out rate. It correlates with our unemployment rate also, so 

there is a correlation there that needs to be addressed. We need 

to openly see the correlation between high dropout and unemployment. There is a connection there. We need to work together in all 

entities to make sure that we can help support our students in the 

success of graduation. 

The social issues our reservation faces are no different than 

other social issues inner cities may face or any other reservation 

but because we are on a reservation, its magnitude is more. We 

need to continue to support the success of our students and encourage them to continue to value education and complete their high 

school graduation. 

43

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Imotichey, the drop out rate for Native students is the highest in the Nation, especially in States like yours 

with high Native populations. In your work, what are the most 

promising strategies for preventing dropouts? 

Ms. IMOTICHEY. I am the senior policy analyst so I can get back 

with our education administrator to find out what are some of the 

more technical things our Tribe is doing in terms of programs to 

be able to decrease dropout rates, but I know that we have several 

programs we really try and encourage. 

We have a robotics program, we have some language programs. 

We recently opened the Chickasaw Cultural Center and we are increasing our programs through that. We are giving our students 

positive things to want to keep them involved in school and in culture. Hopefully, that will reduce some of the dropout rate. 

The CHAIRMAN. I really appreciate you coming because we are 

hearing directly from you, from the Tribes themselves and those of 

you who work in the system. In a sense, we are desperately trying 

to find ways of trying to improve the system. 

Legislatively, for me, would be the last resort. If we can do it administratively, that would be even better as we work out these 

things. There are so many things about education that continuously challenge our people. As you know, one of the things I think 

we have not done too well is to use our language, tradition and culture as a way of trying to educate our young people. 

Also, education is a process that requires as much partnership as 

possible. By that, I mean involving the parents as well as the 

school, the teachers, as well as the community, so it can get larger. 

There are so many areas you can begin to work on in setting up 

a curriculum that can help the young people. 

One other important thing, I feel, is for them to be able to really 

do all of this with pride, pride for their language, culture and traditions. 

We have lots of work to do and as I keep saying, we need to work 

together to bring about all of this. Of course our hope is that the 

bill we are talking about, the Native CLASS bill, does help us in 

this. We are also looking to you to tell us whether it really does 

or doesn’t and to suggest any changes that can help. 

It is important and exciting and we look forward to continuing 

to work with you. I have some other questions for you but I am 

going to submit them and have you respond to them in that way. 

Before I let you go, I just want to give you an opportunity to 

make any statements, suggestions or recommendations as to what 

else we can do. My questions have been probing you to give us 

those kinds of answers. Again, I will give you a chance to make any 

remarks you would like at this point. 

Ms. BRAVE EAGLE. Again, I just want to thank you for inviting 

us and for bringing us to the table to give our comments. I want 

to also say we want to continue to work together as you stated, 

that we need to come together and work together to provide the 

best we can for our children because that is our future. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Ms. IMOTICHEY. I would also like to thank you for the work that 

has been done on this bill. In looking through it, we are very excited about some of the provisions, specifically the language and 

44

culture provisions and the provisions modeled after self governance. I think self governance has really proven to work in other 

ways and we think it can also work in education, so we are very 

excited about that. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, again, thank you, and to all of our witnesses today. This has been a very informative discussion. 

As I said earlier, the introduction of this important legislation 

and our hearing today are only the beginning of our dialogue about 

improving Native education. We encourage you to continue sending 

us your recommendations so that we may further improve the bill. 

Strong roots and a successful future for Native communities depend on the success of our young people and our schools. Again, 

thank you to all of you who participated today and I want to remind you that the committee record will remain open for two 

weeks from today for any additions for the record and also for 

members to submit any questions they may have. 

With that, thank you very much and a safe trip home. Aloha and 

we look forward to working with you. 

This Committee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:18 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(45)

APPENDIX

PREPARED STATEMENT OF COLIN KIPPEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INDIAN

EDUCATION ASSOCIATION

About NIEA 

The National Indian Education Association is the oldest and largest association 

representing American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians. The mission 

of the National Indian Education Association is to support traditional Native cultures and values, to enable Native learners to become contributing members of their 

communities, to promote Native control of educational institutions, and to improve 

educational opportunities and resources for American Indians, Alaska Natives, and 

Native Hawaiians throughout the United States. 

NIEA would like to express its appreciation to Chairman Akaka, Vice Chairman 

Barrasso, and members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs for holding a 

hearing on the Native CLASS Act. We are also thankful to Senator Akaka for incorporating many of the NIEA’s suggestions into this bill. It is our hope that this will 

address many of the needs for Native education stakeholders across the country. A 

rigorous curriculum and relevant instruction are keys to engaging students in research-driven education models that are rooted in the culture, language, histories, 

and traditions of Native students. This benefits not only the individual, but it creates social and economic capital for families, tribes, and communities. We believe 

that S. 1262 is a step in the right direction to improve the status of Native education. 

Areas of S. 1262 Requiring Additional Amendments 

• Restore Assistant Secretary for Indian Education. The current position for the Director is underutilized and functions almost exclusively as a grant manager. 

This AS for Indian Education position must be restored so there is authority 

to engage in and advise the Secretary of Education on all titles of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) that impact Indian student education 

from cradle to career. The Assistant Secretary for Indian Education should also 

facilitate interagency collaboration, implement the role of the tribal education 

agencies in various titles, and serve the needs of higher education and the tribal 

colleges. The AS for Indian Education would preferably be one person with the 

skill and expertise to collaborate and advise the Secretary across the department and to assist in assuring that collaboration and communication increase 

to benefit Indian students and the programs affecting Indians located within 

the Department of Education.

• The Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) needs to be clarified to 

make tribes eligible to access student data. This should be accomplished through 

an amendment that includes tribes (and/or their Tribal Education Departments/

Tribal Education Agencies) as being among the education agencies, authorities, 

and officials to whom protected student records and information can be released 

without the advance consent of parents or students. Such an amendment to 

FERPA would be consistent with the tribal education programs authorized by 

Congress since the ESEA Reauthorizations. 

Conclusion 

NIEA believes that in tough financial times, the investment that yields the greatest return comes from educating our youth. A holistic education that fosters resiliency and a sense of identity are important components of Native education. So, too, 

is a rigorous and relevant curriculum, effective instructors and leaders, and the ability for parents and communities to shape the direction of education their children. 

NIEA looks forward to continuing to work with the Senate Committee on Indians 

Affairs to improve the education status of our Native students. NIEA also will continue to poll our members and to garner comments and suggestions from Native 

teachers, Native administrators, and Native individuals, Native families, and Native 

46

communities across the United States on this seminal legislation known as the Native CLASS Act. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHARLES R. CALICA, SECRETARY-TREASURER/CEO, 

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE WARM SPRINGS RESERVATION OF OREGON


630b1.eps
47


630b2.eps
48


630b3.eps
49


630b4.eps
50


630b5.eps
51


630b6.eps
52

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DELORES PIGSLEY, TRIBAL CHAIRMAN, CONFERATED

TRIBES OF SILETZ INDIANS


630c2.eps
53


630c3.eps
54

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA TO

AMY BOWERS

Question 1. What kind of access and local control would help Native communities 

track and coordinate data about their students, especially as they change schools? 

Answer. Increased and unimpeded access by Tribal Education Departments/Agencies (TEAs) to Native American (NA) student data would help Native communities 

track and coordinate their K–12 students. Express recognition in federal law that 

TEAs can receive NA student data, and sufficient federal funding to support the development and maintenance by TEAs of NA student data systems, would help establish the needed tribal access to and local control of NA student data. 

There are approximately 700,000 K–12 NA students that attend federal, state, 

and tribal schools throughout urban, suburban, and rural areas nationwide. For a 

number of reasons, accurate, comprehensive, and meaningful data for these students is lacking. Federal education reporting requirements often omit NA students 

due to their small numbers. State and local education agencies that do track NA 

students in public schools are nevertheless unable to track the almost 10 percent 


630c1.eps
55

of NA students who attend federal and tribal schools. During their K–12 years, 

many NA students transfer among federal, state, and tribal school systems but the 

systems are not required to transfer student data. Likewise, multiple federal education programs serving NA students, like ESEA Titles I, III, and VII, Impact Aid, 

and JOM are not required to report to each other. 

Given these factors, Tribes uniquely are in the best position to track and coordinate NA student data regardless of the education provider and student location. 

However, an outdated oversight precludes tribes from doing so. The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974, Title V, Sec. 513 of Pub. L. No. 

93–380 (1974), currently codified at 20 U.S.C. Sec. 1232g, generally allows federal, 

state, and local education agencies, authorities, and officials access to student 

records and other personally identifiable information kept by educational institutions without the advance consent of parents or students. 20 U.S.C. Sec. 1232g(b). 

These records typically include attendance records, grades, and test scores. FERPA 

simply does not include tribes or TEAs as entities eligible to obtain such data without advance parental consent. In all but a very few instances, this has thwarted 

tribal access to NA student data. FERPA should be amended expressly on this point 

as follows by adding to Section 1232(g)(b)(1)(C) a new subsection (iii) that reads,

‘‘(1)(C)(i)(iii) authorized representatives of Indian tribes.’’

Once TEAs have regular access to data on NA students in public schools, which 

are where the majority of NA students attend, TEAs can extend their data collection 

to other schools and programs. With a comprehensive database TEAs can synthesize 

and analyze data, which can then be shared with other educational providers and 

entities. 

In addition, the Educational Technical Assistance Act of 2002, Pub. L. 107–279, 

Title II, Sec. 208, currently codified at 20 U.S.C. Sec. 9607, should be amended to 

make tribes expressly eligible for federal funding to develop longitudinal student 

data systems. Currently such funding ($150 million in FY 2009; $100 million projected for FY 2012) is available only to states. Without such federal funding, tribes, 

like states, are unable to develop such systems on their own. With such federal 

funding, tribes can develop student data systems that are compatible with and 

linked to those of states.

Question 2. In your experience in looking at programs where tribes and states 

have worked together to better educate Native students, what were the keys to their 

success? 

Answer. Many of the best examples of tribes and states working together to better 

educate Native students are reflected in the recent K–12 Indian education laws of 

18 states with high NA student populations (Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, 

Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming). 

These state laws, which were developed with direct and significant input from tribes 

and Native communities, include various provisions for K–12 public school curricula 

in NA tribal history, culture, language, and government. The state law developments are remarkable because no federal law requires them. They can be attributed 

to leadership, partnerships, and commitment. They often begin with dialog among 

tribal, state, and local leaders, and parents, teachers, and administrators. A vetting 

of problems leads to an acknowledgment of the need for improvement being in the 

best interests of all involved. Collaborative work begins headed by talent and wisdom, supported by resources, and united by common goals. Effective solutions and 

strategies eventually emerge. After much give and take, buyin, and consensus, a 

final product is produced, typically a state law, policy, or entity (such as a task force 

or an advisory council) that can be institutionalized and implemented. (See the Tribal Education Departments National Assembly 2011 Report on Tribal Education Departments for specific examples of tribes and public schools working together at the 

local level available at www.tedna.org ). 

In the Native CLASS Act, Congress can foster and support more such partnerships to help NA students. Indeed the Native CLASS Act does this by its landmark 

federal law confirmation of a role for tribal governments and TEAs in state public 

school education, authorizing tribal-state cooperative agreements, and providing 

funding for such roles and partnerships. In particular, the authorization of tribalstate cooperative agreements provides a proven framework for tribal-state resolution 

of problems generally while allowing specifically for local solutions. Federal funding 

authorized in the Act will further these efforts and allow and encourage tribes and 

states to review, revise, and sustain their education improvements at the local level. 

56

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JOHN BARRASSO TO

AMY BOWERS

Question 1. What, in your opinion, should be done in the context of Indian education reform to reverse these problems? 

Answer. Increasing NA student high school graduation rates will help to reverse 

these problems. Research and reports have long recommended better links between 

schools and NA communities, and at some level this means formal recognition of a 

role for tribal governments in education, including public school education. Federal 

law and policy can help direct these results, according to an excellent recent study 

co-conducted by Dr. John W. Tippeconnic III, Professor of Education at Pennsylvania State University (attached hereto). Significantly, Dr. Tippeconnic was appointed the Director of the Office of Indian Education Programs (now known as the 

Bureau of Indian Education) in the Department of the Interior under President 

Clinton, and the Director of the Office of Indian Education in the Department of 

Education under President George H. W. Bush. 

The Dropout/Graduation Rate Crisis Among American Indian and Alaska Native 

Students: Failure to Respond Places the Future Of Native Peoples at Risk (2010), Los 

Angeles, CA: The Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles at UCLA; 

www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu., co-authored by Dr. Tippeconnic, confirms that NA 

students have the lowest high school graduation rate of any ethnic group. The lack 

of education progresses into economic hardship, which can develop into social problems such as drug abuse and domestic violence. NA males over the age of 16 are 

particularly vulnerable—in fact only 67 percent of them are part of the labor force. 

Id. at 21. On average, a NA man makes almost $10,000 less annually than all other 

men in the United States. Id. at 22. The NA population typically works in 

serviceoriented jobs which lack benefits and pay less than enough to support a family. Id. Inability to earn wages sufficient to support a family results in NA families 

being twice as likely to live in poverty as non-Natives. Id.

In this report, the authors attribute high NA secondary student dropout rates to 

both institutional and individual factors. Id. at 27. Institutional factors include lack 

of teacher empathy, passive teaching methods, irrelevant curriculum, inappropriate 

testing, tracking, and lack of parental involvement. Id. Individual factors include 

students being ‘‘pushed out of school,’’ poor teacher-student relationships, student 

mobility, substance and alcohol abuse, lack of interest in school, discipline problems, 

and boredom, among other issues. Id. at 28. Factors that can increase graduation 

rates are culturally relevant curriculum, proficiency in students’ native language, 

learning English early, parental encouragement, and small class sizes. Id. at 29. 

Currently, too few schools serving NA students have addressed these factors sufficiently. Despite some positive changes in some states at the state law and policy 

level, at the local level NA parents, communities and tribal governments still play 

a limited role in many schools, even those on Indian reservations. This is largely 

due to lack of resources and expertise, and entrenched attitudes and practices. 

When NAs continue to be excluded from a system, they continue not to trust it. Continued negative perceptions perpetuate poor academic performance and high dropout rates. 

Congress can help reverse these problems by playing a leadership role in linking 

schools and NA communities, and by recognizing roles and opportunities for tribal 

governments and TEAs in public school education. Every ESEA title serves NA students, and every title should have an appropriate role for tribal governments, TEAs, 

NA parents, and communities in the administration, implementation, and reporting 

of each program. (See the Tribal Education Departments National Assembly ESEA 

Reauthorization Recommendations, attached hereto, for specific proposed amendments). The Native CLASS Act begins this process by artfully providing in selected 

Titles an appropriate role for all levels of NA communities to participate in the education of their children.

Question 2. What kind of outreach to state school systems has been undertaken 

to incorporate some of these ideas? 

Answer. For decades, the Federal Government, tribal governments, NA parents, 

teachers, administrators, and states have been discussing the role of tribal governments in public school systems operating on Indian reservations. In some cases, 

states have enacted laws specifically recognizing a substantive or advisory role for 

tribes in public school education. These state laws reflect the Native and non-Native 

leadership, common goals, and collaboration needed to improve Indian education. 

And they lay the foundation for more tribal governments playing an even larger role 

in state public school education. The Native CLASS Act is consistent with and supportive of these state laws and other efforts at the state, tribal, and local levels. 

57

Even in states where such laws have not yet come to fruition, tribal leaders, Indian educators, and parents, as well as national Indian organizations continue to 

meet with states and public school officials to discuss how to improve Indian education. Frequently, progress is hindered by the lack of a defined role for tribal governments in education. This makes collaboration difficult because parties and stakeholders may not know where or how to start working together. Meaningful roles for 

tribal governments defined in federal law, such as those in the Native CLASS Act, 

will facilitate these discussions and result in positive policy reform. 

Generally, national Indian organizations, tribal governments, and NA parents 

continue to work with states and public school systems across the country to educate and generate support for the policy themes in the Native CLASS Act. National 

meetings such as the National Indian Education Association’s Annual Conference, 

Tribal Education Departments National Assembly (TEDNA) Annual Meetings, and 

local meetings between tribes and states frequently discuss these types of policy initiatives. Importantly, for some years TEDNA and NARF have worked directly with 

the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) on such matters. Together we 

developed two publications: Major Elementary and Secondary Federal Education 

Programs Serving Tribal Students: What are they and What are the Roles of SEAs, 

LEAs, and Indian Tribes (2005) and A Manual for Chief State School Officers and 

State Education Agencies on Tribal Sovereignty, Federal Education Programs for 

Tribal Students, and Tribal Education Departments (2006). We continue to engage 

the CCSSO with respect to our legislative priorities, including the Native CLASS 

Act. Finally, TEDNA’s membership works with local school districts as frequently 

as day-to-day to find innovative ways to incorporate tribal education resources into 

state public schools to help meet the needs of NA students. (See TEDNA’s 2011 Report on Tribal Education Departments available at www.tedna.org for specific examples of the use of tribal education resources in public schools). To be sure, the policy 

themes in the Native CLASS Act are not new and have been vetted with states 

across the country. 

58

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA TO

WILLIAM MENDOZA


630d1.eps
59


630d2.eps
60

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JOHN BARRASSO TO

WILLIAM MENDOZA


630d3.eps
61


630d4.eps
62


630d5.eps 630d5a.eps
63

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. MARIA CANTWELL TO

WILLIAM MENDOZA


630d6.eps
64


630d7.eps
65

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. KENT CONRAD TO

WILLIAM MENDOZA

Æ


630d8.eps