Copyright 1999 Federal News Service, Inc.
Federal News Service
JUNE 10, 1999, THURSDAY
SECTION: IN THE NEWS
LENGTH:
3759 words
HEADLINE: PREPARED STATEMENT BY
JOHN W.
CHEEK
ON BEHALF OF THE
NATIONAL INDIAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
BEFORE
THE SENATE HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR AND PENSIONS COMMITTEE
SUBJECT - REAUTHORIZATION OF THE ELEMENTARY
AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT
BODY:
Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Committee:
The National Indian Education Association (NIEA), would like to
thank the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Chairman and members of the
committee for providing the opportunity to present comment on the
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
(ESEA). NIEA is the largest and oldest national non-profit
organization representing the education concerns of over 3,000 American Indian
and Alaska Native educators, school administrators, teachers, parents, and
students. This year NIEA celebrates its 30th anniversary as a national advocate
on behalf of Indian people. NIEA has an elected board of 12 members who
represent various Indian education programs and tribal constituencies from
throughout the nation. Our comments today provide insight into how Indian
educators nationally perceive the Administration's proposal for the
reauthorization of ESEA. We respectfully request that other
Indian organizations and individuals who did not have the opportunity to present
testimony today be allowed to submit their comments for the record.
American
Indians and Alaska Natives Today Today there are over two million American
Indians and Alaska Natives living in the United States. The population of
Indians increased substantially between 1980 and 1990 from 1.4 million to 2
million, representing a 43 percent increase. The 2000 Census will likely show a
marked increase with some early estimates showing the population growing to over
3 million. We are a young population compared with the public at large.
According to the 1990 Census, 40 percent of the Indian population is under the
age of 20 compared to 28 percent nationally. There are 557 federally recognized
tribes in 23 states and dozens of non-federally and state-recognized tribes
throughout the country as well.
There are approximately 600,000 Indian
students attending the nations public, private, and Bureau of Indian Affairs
(BIA)/tribal schools. The primary provider of Indian education services to
public school Indian students is the Department of Education's Office of Indian
Education (OIE) formula program. This program has been in existence since 1972
and provides supplemental services focusing on the unique educational needs of
Indian children. By and large, these programs have operated independentlyover
the years and owe much of their success to the inclusion of parents in local
planning decisions. In the current schools year (FY1999) there are 415,297
public school Indian students and 45,485 BIA students receiving services through
this program for a total of 461,000. The number of grants awarded in 1999
includes: 1,120 to public schools; 84 to BIA-grant/contract schools; and 70 to
BIA-operated schools for a total of 1,274 awards. Since 1989, the number of
students being served through OIE programs increased by over 23 percent (88,000
students). Funding over the same period, however, increased by only 18 percent
to $62 million in 1999. Bureau of Indian Affairs schools have been eligible to
apply for funding through the Indian Education formula program since the 1988
reauthorization of ESEA.
As has been the case with OIE's
student count, so too have BIA schools seen enrollment increases over the past
ten years. The 1989 enrollment was 39,000 compared to 51,378 students in 1999.
Today, BIA students attend 185 federally-operated or contracted schools located
in 23 states. The general trend in BIA education shows tribes beginning to
assume more control over local education programs. This trend is likely to
continue as tribes become more sophisticated in their abilities to manage their
own affairs including administration of education programs.
Between 1980 and
1990, the high school completion rate for American Indians 25 years or older
living on reservations increased by 11 percent from 43 percent to 54 percent.
The graduation rate for all American Indians in 1990 was 66 percent (10 percent
over 1980), but still below the national average of 75 percent. The 1990 Census
identified 9 percent of American Indians and Alaska Natives over the age of 25
with a bachelor's or higher degree compared with 20 percent nationally.
The
Indian Education Act of 1972 In the 1930's state schools became involved with
Indian education on a compensatory basis under federal legislation called the
Johnson O'Malley Act. However, Indian people were not given the opportunity in
either the operation or the direction of their own education. It was not until
the 1960% that Indian people had their educational needs brought to national
attention. In 1968, the Congress created a Subcommittee on Indian Education,
Chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., which held hearings throughout the country
during 1968 and 1969. The report documented the deplorable health, safety and
economic conditions facing Indian people in their communities and the lack of
effective education models for Indian students. Dropout rates of 100 percent
were not uncommon in many reservation areas around the country. The hearings
resulted in major federal legislation, which afforded Indian people a first real
opportunity to participate in the policies and programs that affect their
educational needs. This new legislation was signed into law in 1972 and called
the Indian Education Act of 1972 (Public Law 92-318). The Act provided
supplementary funds for new and innovative programs for Indian students. The
initial appropriation under this Act was $18 million.
The enactment of the
Department of Education on October 17, 1979, changed the organizational
placement and status of Indian Education Programs authorized by Public Law
92-318, Title IV, the Indian Education Act of 1972. Prior to the establishment
of the Department, all then Title IV Indian Education Programs were located in a
distinct and separate organizational entity within the Office of Indian
Education (OIE) at the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW). The
top Indian administrator of OIE, Dr. William Demmert, was the first Deputy
Commissioner to be appointed on January 30, 1975. During this initial phase of
the Act, the Deputy Commissioner reported directly to the Commissioner of
Education. Although all Title IV Indian Education Programs remained intact after
establishment of the United States Department of Education, the Secretary of
Education authorized a change in the organizational placement of Indian
Education Programs to their present location with the Office of Elementary and
SecondaryEducation (OESE). The status and identity of Title IV programs were
changed from a separate Office of Indian Education to Indian Education Programs
and the title of the top Indian administrator was changed from the Deputy
Commissioner for Indian Education to a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Indian
Education. This position formally changed in 1981 to "Director of Indian
Education Programs" who now reports to the Assistant Secretary for OESE, rather
than the Secretary of Education, a significant change in status.
To date, no
other single piece of legislation, has permitted more far- reaching impact of
educational achievement for American Indian and Alaska Native people than the
Indian Education Act of 1972. Without these programs there would be little
educational emphasis linking the unique culture of Indian people with public
education. Even with the focus of Indian Education programs over the past twenty
seven years, there still remains an educational gap that shows Indian students
achieving at a rate lower than all other ethnic groups. A large part of this can
be traced to the historical relationship Indian nations have had with the
federal government over the past few centuries.
Most Indian educators
agree, however, that were it not for the programs offered through the Office of
Indian Education, Indian students would still be achieving at levels lower than
they are today.
1999 Reauthorization of ESEA and
Implications for Indian People The Administration's proposal for the
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act makes several
changes to Indian education programs. First, it eliminates all unfunded
authorizations within the Act which NIEA opposes. The programs designated to be
eliminated include: Indian Fellowships; Gifted and Talented Programs; Grants to
Tribes for Education Administration, Planning and Development; and Adult
Education. Indian Fellowships and Adult Education programs were last funded in
1995 and 1996. The remaining programs have never been funded since being
authorized in the 1994 reauthorization of ESEA. Below we
address the major impact of OIE programs and the impact the proposed legislation
will have if passed in its present form.
Tribal Education Departments The
Tribal Departments of Education authority has been in existence for four years
and has never been recommended for funding within the Department of Education
budget hierarchy. Since its authorization NIEA has advocated for at least $3
million to assist tribes in developing their education department
infrastructures. As tribes move toward more local control over education
programs, they will need the ability to manage and design programs that align
with tribal codes and state/national assessment criteria. The Bureau of Indian
Affairs has a similar authority, but it has never been funded, except for one
$100,000 grant to the Mississippi Choctaw Indian Nation several years ago.
Although no funding is provided in the President's FY2000 BIA education budget,
NIEA has recommended $3 million for tribal departments of education. We believe
that sufficient funding should be provided to assist tribes in planning and
developing their own centralized tribal administrative entities to accomplish
their goals in accordance with school reform and accreditation needs. Whether
this is accomplished through the Department of Education or Interior is
irrelevant given the fact that both agencies would need to be involved to ensure
accountability. This would be appropriate given the recent trend to convert more
schools from BIA to Tribal control. Funding for tribal education departments has
been endorsed by NIEA's membership as well as by the National Congress of
American Indians (NCAI) which represents over 250 tribes.. Adult Education
Program The Adult Education program was funded for many years and clearly
addressed a major need in the Indian community. NIEA has consistently advocated
for this program and has identified adult education as one of the major
priorities for Indian people in 1999. After funding for the program was
eliminated in 1995,Members of Congress looked at the idea of creating a similar
program under the Adult Education Act which was then undergoing its own
reauthorization. The proposal was dropped when the Office of Vocational
Education (OVAE) data indicated that American Indians seemed to be served well
under State adult education programs. NIEA has always been concerned with the
data collection efforts of the Department and they way it counts the number of
Indian participants.. The practice of self-identification typically does not
include any type of documentation to identify an individual as a member of a
certain tribe and as a result, we feel the numbers acquired through most
Department of Education studies are greatly inflated.
The adult education
program was a success because it went to where the Indian adults were, in their
communities. The reason many Indian adults did not finish high school was
because of the difficulty in trying to cope in a non-Indian environment. Adult
education programs assisted on average anywhere from 5,000 and 11,000
participants annually. After the Department of Education declined to request
funding for the Adult Education Program, appropriators simultaneously cut BIA's
adult education budget in half to $2.5 million which is its current
appropriation request for 2000. Prior to 1996, the Indian adult education effort
of the federal government exceeded $10 million.
Gifted and Talented The
Gifted and Talented authority has been in effect since 1988 and federal
officials have been reluctant to fund an outright Indian- specific program. The
authority, to our understanding, was seen as overly prescriptive and would have
required the Secretary to fund two gifted and talented centers at tribal
colleges, plus several demonstration grants, including other projects with BIA
schools. A 1991 Longitudinal study on eighth grade students reported the average
participation in programs specially designated for gifted and talented students
is about 8.8 percent. The American Indian and Alaska Native participation rate
is only 2.1 percent in comparison. NIEA supports gifted and talented programs
for Indian students as a means of increasing the representation of American
Indians into increasingly high technical professions such as medicine,
engineering, computer technology and the math and science fields. From recent
data surveys, the representation of Indian participants in these areas is
extremely low.
Indian Fellowships The Department and the Administration
proposed the repeal of the fellowships authority in 1993-94, arguing that the
program didn't create any real incentive for Institutions of Higher Education
(IHEs) to make an effort to educate Indian students. It was assumed that a
better approach was to pursue IHEbased programs rather than a costly
grants-to-individuals program. An Inspector General's report in August 1993,
detailed the problems of administering the fellowship program to individuals
rather than to institutions of higher education. Lack of permanent leadership in
OIE, and insufficient staff resources led to the program being abandoned by the
Department in favor of other approaches to assisting postsecondary Indian
students.
As a former staffer with the National Advisory Council on Indian
Education (NCAIE), which once had the authority to review Indian fellowship
applications prior to funding, there was a consistent gap in meeting the
postsecondary needs of Indian students. Those applications slated to be funded
were always rated at 100 points or the maximum allowable. Even dozens of
applications below the cut-off would be highly-scored as well, but could not be
funded due to funding limitations. On average 600 to 800 applications would be
received in any given grant cycle and of this only 150 applications on average
could be funded. Between1985 and 1994 the number of applications awarded dropped
from 221 to 80 due to funding reductions. The last year of funding provided
awards to 75 students. Between 1985 and1996 a total of 1,900 students went
through the Indian Fellowship program. The program was eventually phased out in
1996 after allowing those who received prior year awards to complete their
programs.
The costs of providing scholarship assistance to Indian students,
in our opinion, outweighed to perceived program management difficulties within
the Department. While current initiatives focus on teacher training, which is
also needed, there are no specific higher education programs that ensure a
finite number of Indian applicant's enter other fields of study. The Indian
Health Service program allows for a little over 100 students to enter the health
professions and BIA scholarships, as administered by tribes, assist less than
10,000 students with an average of $3,000 in 1999. The Department of Education
estimate for the number of Indians attending postsecondary institutions is over
130,000. The current estimate in the number of Indian students being served by
specific Indian higher education programs is estimated at 35,000 which includes
25,000 tribal college students. How the remaining 105,000 Indian students are
being supported in postsecondary institutions is a question NIEA would like to
have answered.
Indian Technical Assistance Centers The 1994 reauthorization
of ESEA eliminated six Indian Technical Assistance Centers
(ITACs)which provided programmatic-based assistance to formula grantees
nationwide. With the advent of the new Comprehensive Regional Technical
Assistance Centers in 1994, fewer and larger centers were thought to better
provide for the technical assistance needs or programs in the field for all
Department of Education K-12 programs. The concern at the time was that Indian
grantees would receive fewer technical assistance opportunities without a center
specifically identified for their needs. From a cursory review of recent Indian
grantees we found that indeed technical assistance among Indian grantees was
lacking in sufficient quality and quantity. The 1999 proposal for the
reauthorization of ESEA plans to eliminate these centers as
being ineffective in meeting the demands at the local education agency level.
The focus will change by having local districts and states assume the technical
assistance needs of their schools. NIEA has little data to support how well the
current comprehensive centers have met the needs of Indian grantees, but our
estimation is that they have been unable to serve all 1,200 grantees who make up
the formula program under Title IX. The previous ITACS were regionally dispersed
and better able to meet the needs of Indian projects by providing in-service
workshops on a variety of topics associated with OIE programs.
In
relation to NIEA, they served a valuable purpose by conducting annual showcase
events at our national convention, and awarded the programs with the best
practices their regions. These events provided a valuable service in showing how
well projects could be designed based on systemic reform and schoolwide
approaches being implemented by the Department. The new reauthorization does
indicate that two categorical centers would be developed that would meet the
needs of special population groups. One would be targeted to the specific needs
encountered by Indian programs. NIEA fully supports a return to technical
assistance centers to assist local grantees in meeting their educational goals.
Indian Education Executive Order In August of 1998, President Clinton signed
Executive Order 13096 on Indian Education. It had as its centerpiece initiative
six goals that federal agencies should meet. These include: l) Improving reading
and mathematics; 2) Increasing high school completion and postsecondary
attendance rates; 3) Reducing the influence of long-standing factors that impede
educational performance, such as poverty and substanceabuse; 4) Creating strong,
safe, and drug-free school environments; 5) Improving science education; and 6)
Expanding the use of educational technology. These goals laid the groundwork for
federal agencies to begin coordinating efforts and resources to begin addressing
the education needs of all American Indians and Alaska Natives. NIEA's
overriding concern in light of the Administration ESEA proposal
is how a plan that removes such key authorizations could even consider meeting
the goals being espoused by the Executive Order. The language of the Order
clearly commits the Administration to comprehensive actions to improve the
education of American Indian people, but doesn't make any commitments with
respect to individual programs. To reiterate, the authorizations being removed
from ESEA include: 1) fellowships for Indian students, 2)
gifted and talented education, 3) adult education, and 4) support for tribal
departments of education. NIEA's recommendation is to leave these authorization
intact and begin funding them accordingly. These programs provide the perfect
vehicle for ensuring the goals of the executive order are reached. New proposals
are often more difficult to get into law and in the case of Indian programs are
often the easiest to remove since the constituent fallout is less due to a
smaller voting population.
All of these provisions could be used to
implement the Executive Order in one form or another. The adult education
provision, which focuses primarily on adult literacy, could serve as "pipeline"
for future teachers, especially in line with the proposed American Indian
Teacher Corps which is in the Administration's budget request at $10 million.
The Indian Fellowship program, while very expensive, could serve as a gateway
opportunity to under represented professions. The Gifted and Talented program
would help identify effective practices that could be applied to all Indian
students.
But the provision that may have the most compelling link to the
Executive Order is the tribal departments authority which would provide funding
support to tribal governments to create and/or strengthen educational
administrative structures within the tribal organization. By creating a more
stable tribal structure, the tribes could more readily collaborate with the SEAs
and the LEAs as directed in the EO. By all accounts, the Department of Education
has historically opposed this provision arguing that this should be the
responsibility of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. NIEA believes both agencies need
a hand in ensuring Tribal Departments of Education succeed. One for the role of
tribal governance and one for the needs of the Indian learner. What better
example could there be of federal agency coordination than that envisioned by
Tribal Departments of Education? NIEA's believes that it would provide be a much
needed boon to the Department's relationship with tribes and reinforces the
Administration's commitment to the executive order.
Conclusion On behalf of
the NIEA Board of Directors and the NIEA membership I would like to thank the
committee for allowing us to share our concerns today. We appreciate the
opportunity to provide comment on what is probably the most important aspect of
life in Indian communities today. Once a tool to decimate and forcibly
assimilate Indians into modern day existence, education has proven to be an
effective deterrent to the many social ills still facing Indian people today.
The lack of a consistent and focused federal policy on Indian education,
however, has only delayed the educational advancement of this country's only
indigenous population. Until a clear and direct approach is undertaken to
elevate every education level of all American Indians and Alaska Natives in this
country, we will continue to see the dismal statistics that unfortunately
continue to plague Indian Country. We hope that our comments here today have
helped to clarify the need that continues to exist in Indian education. I would
be happy to answer any questions the committee may have.
END
LOAD-DATE: June 12, 1999 
