Pex )>«'(»' In presenting this thesis- in partial fulfillment of the require¬ ments for an advanced degree at Montana State University, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this professional paper for scholarly purposes may be granted by my major professor, or, in his absence, by the Director of Libraries. It is understood that any copy¬ ing or publication of this professional paper for financial gain shall THE EXTENT OF SPOKEN CROW AND CHEYENNE AMONG INDIAN STUDENTS OF THE CROW AND NORTHERN CHEYENNE INDIAN RESERVATIONS by JOHN IRWIN DRAGON A professional paper submitted to the Graduate Faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF EDUCATION in School Administration Approved MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Bozeman, Montana August, 1970 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION 1 A. Statement of the Problem(s) k B. Procedures Followed in Conducting the Study 10 C. Limitations of the Study 13 D. Definitions of Terms Used l4 II. A DISCUSSION OF THE BILINGUAL CHARACTERISTICS, CENSUS DATA AND OTHER RELATED FACTORS l6 A. Crow Reservation Findings 16 B. Northern Cheyenne Reservation Findings 1? III. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 26 BIBLIOGRAPHY 30 APPENDIX 31 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1 School Enrollments of Schools on or Near the Crow and Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservations 33 2 Total School Enrollments and Language Characteristics by Grades on the Crow Reservation 3^ 3 Enrollment and Language Characteristics by Grades - Hardin 33 4 Enrollment and Language Characteristics by Grades - Lodge Grass 36 5 Enrollment and Language Characteristics by Grades - Edgar 37 6 Enrollment and Language Characteristics by Grades - .Fort Smith and St. Xavier 33 7 Enrollment and Language Characteristics by Grades - St. Charles and Pryor 39 ,8 Enrollment and Language Characteristics by Grades - Wyola and Crow Agency 40 9 Percent of Indian and Non-Indian by Individual Schools - Crow Reservation ••• 4i 10 Enrollment and Language Characteristics by Grades of Crow Students in Out of State Government Boarding Schools... 42 TABLE PAGE 11 Total School Enrollments and Language Characteristics by Grades - Northern Cheyenne Reservation 43 12 Enrollment and Language Characteristics by Grades - Busby 44 13 Indians Enrolled Other Than Cheyenne - Busby 45 14 Enrollment and Language Characteristics by Grades and Indians Enrolled Other Than Cheyenne - Lame Deer • • • • • 46 15 Enrollment and Language Characteristics by Grades - St. Labre 47 16 Indians Enrolled Other Than Cheyenne - St. Labre 48 17 Percent of Indian and Non-Indian by Individual Schools - Northern Cheyenne Reservation 49 Abstract In the fall of 19^9t schools from the Crow, Northern Cheyenne, and Rocky Boy Indian Reservations decided to cooperate in a joint bilingual education program to be funded under the Bilingual Education Act (Title VII - ESEA). In order to meet certain minimum requirements for funding under Title VII, the existence of a true bilingual school population had to be established. All three reservations had a bilingual school popula¬ tion, but no study had previously been made to determine to what extent the native languages existed among school-age children. A study was then conducted in the schools throughout the Crow ayd Northern Cheyenne Reservations to determine certain essential facts. Those facts were: 1. How many Indian students spoke their native languages as a primary or dominant language? 2. How many Indian students spoke their native languages as a secondary language? 3* How many Indian students spoke only English? 4. Were the Indian languages diminishing? Population trends, school census data, etc. All the students (Grades 1-12) totalling 3626, of which 2020 were Indian, had their lingual characteristics assessed. The schools on or near the two Reservations participated in the study. The author with the assistance of Indian-speaking interpreters visited each classroom and conducted the study. The study revealed the following. On the Crow Reservation, 82% of the Crow students were dominant Crow speakers; 8% were secondary Crow speakers; 10% spoke only English. Of the Cheyenne students, 35% were dominant Cheyenne speakers; l8% were secondary Cheyenne speakers; 27% were speakers of only English. Both reservations showed a steady increase in Indian enrollment. No statistical evidence was discovered which would suggest that either language was diminishing among the young. ^The Rocky Boy schools were not included in the study. CHAPTER I Introduction In 1965» Congress passed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) to assist the nation’s schools in meeting the demands of modern education. Among the several acts making up the whole of ESEA was the Bilingual Education Act (Title VII). This act was hailed by many educators to be answer to certain school problems because it promised to provide funds and technical assistance to schools having a bilingual school population. The bilingual child, e.g., the Spanish and Indian child, on the average, shows a dramatic lack in oral English ability when he enters school. He also usually brings with him a culturally different back¬ ground. His lingual characteristics and cultural differences create immense problems for the schools which are normally geared for the monolingual English speaking child with a middle-class background. Bilingual and culturally different school populations, however, do not exist in complete isolation except in a few rare cases. Normally, sizable groups of children, whether they be from the dominant culture or not, co-exist within the same general area. Thus the schools are faced with a dilemma—what to do with culturally and linguistically diverse groups of children within the context of the school. -2- The early efforts in bilingual education under Title VII were mainly attempted in the Spanish speaking communities of the United States. Educators reasoned that: The basic problem was the inability of the school to cope with the language and cultural assets of the Spanish-speaking youngsters. Many of these young people came to school speaking Spanish with a limited or non-existent communication skill in English, and frequently the youngster was functionally non-communi- cative in both languages...As a means of hastening his acquisition of English, speaking of Spanish was forbidden at school. The result was that the Spanish¬ speaking child might spend more than two years learning English, isolated from the rest of his class¬ mates for a large part of the school day. The in¬ evitable happened: The youngster was caught in a lang¬ uage and culture conflict between his home and school. He began to doubt his identity as a member of a family with a treasured language and culture, and to suspect the motives of the school in insisting that he reject his linguistic and cultural diversity in order to meet the standards of the system...1 Educators from Montana Indian reservations, aware of the similarity between their school problems and those of the Spanish speaking communities, began to recognize the potential of bilingual educational programs. In the fall of 19^9» the Montana State Department of Public Instruction called together educators and lay persons from the seven Montana Indian reservations. The purpose of this meeting was to (l) outline the eligibility requirements for 1Armando Rodriguez, "The Necessity for Bilingual Education,*' Wilson Library Bulletin, (March 1970), pp. 726-7 -3- assistance under Title VII and (2) to seek a cooperative bilingual education proposal from all interested school districts. Three school districts representing three Indian reservations, the Crow, the Northern Cheyenne, and the Rocky Boy (Chippewa-Cree), decided they could meet the requirements for assistance, viz., a high-incidence of children from low-income backgrounds and a signi¬ ficant number of children speaking a language other than English as a dominant language. It was then decided that a cooperative bilingual education proposal (preliminary) would be submitted to the TJ.S. Office of Education for review. It was also decided that School District 17-H (Hardin) would act as the fiscal agent, should such a program be funded. The Hardin administration released the author of this paper to develop both the preliminary proposal and the final proposal. Just what is meant by bilingual education? The U.S. Office of Education has defined the purposes of a bilingual education program to be a program which: ...is designed to meet the special educational needs of children who have limited English-speaking ability, who come from environments where the dominant language is one other than English, and who come from low-income families.^ ^Manual for project applicants for programs under Bilingual Education Act (Title VII ESEA) March 20 draft, 1970, p. 1. -4- Bilingual education can be further defined as: ...the use of two languages, one of which is English, as mediums of instruction for the same pupil population in a well-organized program which encompasses part or all of the curriculum and includes the study of history and culture associated with the mother tongue. A complete program develops and maintains the children’s self-esteem and a legitimate pride in both cultures.1 In even greater detail, bilingual educational programs are pro¬ grams which possess the following characteristics: 1. English is recognized and taught as a second language to a child whose dominant language is one other than English. 2. The child's dominant language is recognized and taught as a first language. 3. The child is taught one or more academic subjects in his dominant language, at least until he has mastered enough English. 4. The child whose dominant language is English is taught the dominant language of the other children. 5* There is provision made for increasing the instructional use of both languages for both groups in the same classroom. 6. The child is taught the history and cultural heritage which reflects the value system of speakers of both languages. A. Statement of the Problem(s) Among the numerous and important considerations which had to be examined before a formal bilingual proposal could be developed (in fact, ^Bilingual Education Manual, op. cit., p. 1 -5- that which went to the heart of the proposal) was the extent to which bilingualism actually existed in the reservation area school popula¬ tions. Heretofore, no study had been made on either the Crow or the Northern Cheyenne Reservations which could point to (with a reasonable degree of accuracy) the extent that bilingualism existed among school age children.^ Reservation area teachers and administrators were fully aware of the large numbers of speakers of Crow and Cheyenne in their schools. But they could not say, for example, to what extent the native lang¬ uages existed. Thus the author of this study was faced with the task of determining a number of facts, some directly related to the ques¬ tion of bilingualism itself, and some related necessarily to the ques¬ tion of whether a bilingual education program was relevant, feasible, etc. In order to establish these facts and the educational inferences which could be drawn from them, and after considerable consultation with local educators, persons from the State Department of Public Instruction and others, the author decided to conduct a study. In developing the study the author was faced with a series of problems which divided themselves into three (3) main categories. These three categories were: "^Personnel from the Rocky Boy Reservation conducted their own bilingual study. -6- 1. The problem of who was to be involved in the study, i.e., which schools should be involved? 2. The problem(s) of what was to be ascertained about bilingualism on both the Crow and the Northern Cheyenne Reservations. 3. The problem(s) of how such was to be measured, recorded, etc. The Problem of Who It was decided to involve all school age children (Grades 1-12) from the schools on or near the Crow and Northern Cheyenne Reserva¬ tions.^" It should be noted that the two reservations are adjacent, both sharing a common border, with the Crow Reservation lying to the west of the Northern Cheyenne Reservation. The decision to also include schools near the two reservations was based on the fact that many of these schools have sizable Indian enrollments. All the schools involved in t£e study had Indian students in attendance. Six different school systems exist on or immediately near the Crow Reservation with a total of nine separate school sites. The largest of these systems, Hardin, administrates elementary schools at Crow Agency and Fort Smith, besides Hardin. The other public schools are Lodge Grass, Wyola, Edgar, and Pryor. Two Catholic mission schools, St. Xavier and St. Charles are also found on the Crow Reservation. These schools vary in enrollment from 1350 students down to 40 students. Three school systems exist on the Northern Cheyenne ^"Northern Cheyenne students attending Colstrip Public School were not included in the study. -7- students down to 40 students. Three school systems exist on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation: Busby (BIA); Lame Deer (Public); and St. Labre (Catholic Mission), (see Table 1 for individual school breakdowns) The Problem of What The problem(s) of what subdivided into two categories. These were (l) determining the bilingual characteristics of all students in the schools named above and (2) gathering school census data, determining growth patterns, etc. Bilingual Characteristics (of each reservation) The following questions were considered basic to the information about bilingualism which was sought: 1. How many Indian students spoke the Indian language as a primary or dominant language? 2. How many Indian students spoke the Indian language as a secondary language? 3. How many Indian students did not speak the Indian language? In other words how many were monolingual English speakers? 4. Did fewer Indian students (proportionately) speak the native or Indian language today than did in the past, i. e., between grades one and twelve? In other words were there significant signs that the Indian tongue as a dominant language was diminishing? Census Data, etc, (by individual school and by reservation) -8- The following census information was considered basic to the whole question of bilingual education: a) How many Indian students were enrolled? b) How many white students were enrolled? c) What were the percentages of both Indians and whites? d) In what grades were the greatest concentration of Indians and whites found - were there any growth patterns unfolding? e) Other data, e*g., what other Indian tribes were represented other than Crow and Northern Cheyenne? The Problem(s) of How When the study was being conceived, the author devised a questionnaire which could be filled out by the classroom teacher. Such a questionnaire was designed to get answers to the questions listed above. However, when an analysis was made of the data which were going to be determined by the questionnaire, the questionnaire was rejected as a means for obtaining such data for the following reasons: 1. Too much data were being sought via an instrument such as a questionnaire. 2. The nature and complexity of the study required identical assessing methods and procedures if the study*s results were to have any validity. . Considerable confusion among educators existed as to the questionnaire*s terminology, e.g., dominant language, bilingualism, etc. 3 -9- 4. Gathering such data was a time-consuming task and as such was an imposition upon both teachers and administrators. In lieu of a questionnaire, and faced with a federal deadline of one month in submitting a preliminary bilingual proposal, the author decided that the most practical, expeditious, and effective way to conduct the study was to do so in person. He, therefore, decided to visit each school and each class of each school. After explaining to the various school administrations the purposes of the study, etc., permission to visit the schools for the express purpose of conducting the study was asked. Permission in every case was granted. In order for the recording of the data to be uniform, a recording sheet for each class with appropriate spaces for identifying the class, school, etc., plus the data being sought was developed by the author. Determining certain data, e.g., the number of Indians and whites in each class, created no special problems. However, the data relating to bilingualism itself were of a unique nature and assessing and recording them accurately was a special problem. Assessing the bilingual characteristics of the children required the services of native speaking interpreters. With the older children, getting this information presented no particular problem. But with the younger children, particularly those in the elementary grades, the presence of native speakers was absolutely necessary. -10- Fortunately, getting interpreters proved to be no problem. Each school had Indian personnel present, e.g., teacher aides, Head Start assistants, cooks, home-school liaison, etc., said these persons were incorporated into the study as the author went from school to school. Also, several classroom teachers were native Crow speakers and assisted the author. One, Mrs. Josephine Russell, a classroom teacher at Crow Agency, accompanied the author throughout most of the Crow Reservation and, of course, proved to be invaluable. The reader should be made aware of the following facts. Of the 230 classroom teachers serving both the Crow and Northern Cheyenne Reservations, only 7 have an Indian heritage. Approximately of the students from schools on or near the Crow Reservation are Indian.^ In the Northern Cheyenne Reser¬ vation schools, 90% are Indian.2 B. Procedures Followed in Conducting the Study. After it was decided what was to be determined by the study, the permission to visit the school granted, etc., the procedures listed below were then followed. ^As verified by this study. 2Ibid, -11- Upon arrival at each school, the administrator, either the superintendent and/or principal was contacted. A short review of the study’s purposes was then given. Also, at this time the admini¬ strators were asked to recommend a native speaking person(s) from their staffs who might assist the author with the study. The author then contacted these people, explained the purpose(s) of the study, and asked for their assistance. Without exception the native speaking Indian people agreed to assist the author. The next step was to go into detail with the interpreters as to the exact nature of the bilingual characteristics being assessed. After this was accomplished, the next step was to visit the classrooms. Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 The. following routine was then followed. - After asking permission from the teacher to visit her class, apologizing for the interruption, making the introductions, etc., a brief explanation was given to both the teacher and the class about the purpose of the visit. The amount of detail depended upon the age of the group. - A classroom census was taken - how many Indians, how many whites, how many students absent, etc. The names of the absent students were recorded for later reference. - The bilingual characteristics were assessed. Usually, the interpreters began asking general questions in the -12- native language, i*e., either Crow or Cheyenne and directing them to the Indian students. Almost without exception, the interpreters already knew the individual children and whether they were dominant Indian speakers or not. The interpreters noted the responses to their questions and made their recommendations to the author. When they were in doubt about a child, i.e., whether he spoke his native language as a dominant or a secondary language, more concentrated questions were asked of that child, e.g., what is your father’s name, where do you live, etc. The interpreters (two or more were usually present) and the classroom teacher would then reach a conclusion about that particular child. The author would then record their recommendations. Finally, the absent students were accounted for in terms of their bilingual characteristics. This did not prove to be too difficult since both the teacher and the interpreters already knew a great deal about the child and his family. Great pains to be consistent in the approaches were taken by the author as he visited each school. Normally, he began with the first grade children and then worked up to the next grade. To account for the older Crow Indian students who were attending out-of-state boarding schools, the author visited the tribal education -13- officials and obtained information about the students, their families, etc. With the help of native speaking people, their bilingual char¬ acteristics were inferred. This information is included in the Appendix. The routine described above was followed from school to school. The school visits took over two weeks. After the compilations of all the data were made, they were put into breadowns by individual schools and by reservations and then sent to the cooperating schools for their scrutiny.^ C. Limitations of the Study The study was limited to answering only those questions posed in the Statement of the Problem. Pt did not attempt to measure in any way, nor should it be construed & the reader to have measured, the proficiency in either the native language or in English which the Indian students possessed. Generally speaking, the Indian student who spoke his language as a primary or dominant language showed a serious deficiency in his oral English ability. There were, of course, Indian students who were equally facile in both languages, but they were truly in the minority. ^The author did not visit Edgar Public School. The Edgar Superintendent, Fred Trimmer, was familiar with the design of the study and made the assessment with the assistance of his staff. -14- It must also be recognized by the reader that many Indian students, who are dominant native speakers, have insufficient development in their own language when compared to other native speakers of their peer group. But the author repeats, this study did not attempt to measure either the Indian or the English oral proficiency of the Indian students. D. Definitions of Words Used in the Study. Bilingual - The word "bilingual11 and its variance as used in the study referred to the ability to speak two or more languages. The word bilingual, however, did not imply, in terms of the study, mastery of either language (or degrees of mastery). Bilingual Student - The words "bilingual student" referred to students who, because of a family and/or peer relationships, had some ability in either the Indian or English languages. Being such a student did not imply mastery of either language or degrees of mastery. Indian - For purposes of the study the word "Indian" was defined as a person who was enrolled as a member of an Indian tribe. Primary or Dominant Speaker - Both the words "primary" and "dominant" were considered as synonomous in the study. They referred to the Indian student who learned to speak his native language first at home, -15- who continued to speak such language at home, and who spoke his native language in his peer relationships. Secondary Speaker - A "secondary” speaker was defined as an Indian student who had a slight conversational and/or listening ability in Indian. English was obviously the primary language of the student. Such a student had some exposure to the Indian language when he was very young or in his peer relationships. Such students could respond accurately to simple questions and commands in Indian. Usually, such a student could understand more in Indian than he could say. He responded in English rather than Indian to simple Indian queries. Monolingual Speaker - A "monolingual” speaker was defined as an Indian student who spoke only English CHAPTER II A Discussion of the Bilingual Characteristics, Census Data and Other Related Factors Crow Reservation The study examined a total of 2665 students for their bilingual characteristics* Of this number,'1131 were Indian and 153^ were non- Indian. Of the 1131 Indian students, 1102 were members of the Crow Tribe. Of this number 906 or 82$ spoke Crow as a dominant language. A total of 86 or 8$ of the Crow students spoke Crow as a secondary language. Only 110 or 10$ of the Crow students spoke just English, (see Appendix for tables on individual school and reservation break¬ downs) There was no evidence to conclude that the Crow language was on the wane, i.e., that it was diminishing proportionately between first and twelfth grades. Of 162 Crow first grade students, 13^ or 82$ spoke Crow as a dominant language. Of Mf Crow twelfth graders, 33 or 79% spoke dominant Crow. The highest percentage of Crow dominant speakers was found in the ninth grade - 90$; the lowest percentage was found in the eleventh grade - 72$. The data showed that for the first time, the Crow Indian enroll¬ ment in an individual grade exceeded that of the white enrollment. The first grades had 163 Indian students and 138 white students. -17- Contrasting this with the figures from the twelfth grades showed only 44 Indians enrolled as opposed to 95 whites. It should he noted by the reader that the apparent disparity between these figures is not really as great as it seems when the Indian potential enrollment is analyzed. Thirteen Crow twelfth graders were enrolled in out-of-state boarding schools. Also, the drop-out rate among Indians is higher than among the white students. But an unmistakable trend is emerging. The Indian school popu¬ lation is growing proportionately faster than is the white school population. Reservation birth rates among Indians are quoted as three times the national average. This growth, plus the fact of dominant Crow speaking among the young, suggests that the bilingual dilemma referred to above will continue to plague the reservation area schools. Only 24 Indian students from tribes other than the Crow were enrolled in Crow Reservation area schools. The tribes represented were the Blackfeet, Northern Cheyenne, Comanche, Chippewa-Cree, Sioux, Shoshone, Cherokee, and Gros Ventre. Northern Cheyenne Reservation The study examined a total of 9^1 students for their bilingual characteristics. Of this number 889 were Indian, and of this 750 were members of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe. Seventy-two students were white. Of the 750 Cheyenne students, 401 or 55# spoke dominant Chey- -18- enne. One hundred and thirty-three or l8$ spoke Cheyenne as a secondary language, and 196 or 2?$ spoke only English. There was also no evidence to support the contention that the Cheyenne language was on the wane. Of 86 Cheyenne first graders, 40 or k8% spoke Cheyenne as a dominant language. Of 20 Cheyenne twelfth graders, 8 or spoke dominant Cheyenne. The twelfth grade just mentioned represented the lowest percentage of dominant speakers. The fifth grade had the highest percentage - 5^ students out of a total of 80 or 67#. Similar to the Crow student population, the Cheyenne population has also shown steady growth. The reader should note that the white enrollment on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation has never been of much consequence in terms of numbers. Considerable land is deeded to whites within the exterior boundaries of the Crow Reservation. The same is not true on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation. An interesting contrast in schools also exists on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation. Two of the schools, Busby and St. Labre, are boarding schools. Busby, the only BIA boarding school in Montana, is located at the western edge of the Northern Cheyenne Reservation. St. Labre, a Catholic Mission boarding school, is located at the eastern edge of the reservation. Lame Deer, the sole public school, is located in the middle of the reservation. The presence of the two boarding schools accounted for the 159 Indian students who were not Cheyenne. The tribes represented were the -19- Crow, Sioux, Gros Ventre, Cree, Blackfeet, Arapaho, Assiniboine, Chippewa-Cree, Arikara, Flathead, Kootenai, Shoshone, Cherokee, Apache, Southern Cheyenne, Pima, Yakima, and Klamath. However, rather than conclude this Chapter with just these state¬ ments of fact, although they satisfy the immediate purpose of the study, the author would like to discuss two important related aspects. These are (l) the existence of bilingualism itself on the two reser¬ vations and (2) whether there is a need for bilingual educational programs on such reservations. Considering the latter aspect first, there are those educators who contend that continued bilingualism, i.e., the fact that the Indian languages will continue to prevail besides English, is too high a price to pay for retaining cultural diversity; that the assets of this kind of bilingualism are completaly outweighed by the liabilities. To many of these educators, the introduction of bilingual instructional programs is a step backwards, an unnecessary and misguided bit of educational chicanery. Such educators are fully aware of the educational handicaps the native speaking Indian child possesses when he enters school with an insufficient command of oral English. Whether or not this is true is not in dispute. The overwhelming majority of Indian students have serious, highly demonstrable deficiencies in oral English, the language which is inseparable from their education. No studies need -20- to be conducted on reservations such as the Crow and Northern Cheyenne to discover this fact. Only teaching exposure is necessary. Many of these educators reason that if the Indian child did not speak his native language, he would speak only English. Therefore, he would have English competency, and the educational handicaps arising out of his native language such would cease. The natives languages are no longer spoken by school age children on several other Montana Indian reservations. Yet, educators from these reservations report similar kinds of educational problems, viz., a substandard command of oral Eng]ish, insufficient student achievement, irregular school attendance, a high drop-out rate, low educational and occupational aspirations, negative self-images, etc. Obviously, the existence of the native language is in itself of no major consequence in terms of whether or not the Indian child is getting "on" in education. The fact that an Indian child speaks his native language is only one of many factors which contributes to the inability of the school to structure meaningful programs. The mere absence of the language is not going to solve the educational problems attendant to Indian children. If it were so, Indian children speaking only English would have trem¬ endous advantages over native speaking Indian children. The evidence does not support such a conclusion. -21- Historically, the schools on both reservations have discouraged the use of the native languages. While no ’'official” reasons have been given for such a policy, the premises behind such a practice are readily apparent. Educators reason, for example, that the Indian children come from a small ethnic group; there are no "practical11 reasons for the languages to exist in a "modern” society; the Indian must be prepared to live in a dominant white, English speaking society; English is rapidly becoming the second language in many other countries; the existence of the native languages is a hinderance in the development of English; the languages are not written; and consequently, no written curricular materials exist. Therefore, if the Indian child is discouraged from speaking Indian, he will speak more English, and the more English he speaks, the better he will get at it, etc., etc. At first glance, such a rationale may seem reasonable. Indians are a small ethnic group; they must be prepared to live in a dominant white, English speaking society, etc. But when this rationale is carefully examined for what it_ has promoted in terms of the Indian child's education, the opposite view or conclusion might be reached, viz., that the Indian child should be encouraged to speak his native language at school and that such a language ought to be accommodated as a legitimate aspect of the child’s education. -22- There is not an inverse relationship between discouraging, for example, Crow on one hand and improving English skills on the other. If such a relationship existed, the pragmatist could argue for discouraging Crow. The strong possibility exists that in discouraging the native languages - when it is the child*s dominant language - it may in fact retard that child*s eventual development in English. It is not difficult, for example, to distinguish between a native English speaking child learning in English, and the Indian child who is attempting to learn in English while he is learning English, parti¬ cularly, when the native language is being discouraged or at best ignored. Bilingual education as sponsored by the USOE affirms the primary importance of English, yet: ...it also recognized that the use of the children’s mother tongue in school can have a beneficial effect upon their education. Instructional use of the mother tongue can help prevent retardation in school performance until sufficient command of English is attained. Moreover, the development in literacy in the mother tongue as well as in English should result in more broadly educated adults.^ In view of (l) the high concentration of dominant (Indian) speaking children on both reservations, (2) the rapid growth in evid¬ ence of the Indian school population, (3) the fact that the languages are not diminishing proportionately among the young, and (4) the ^-Manual for project applicants for programs under Bilingual Education Act (Title VII ESEA) March 20 draft, 1970, p,l. -23- admitted failure of the school to accommodate children possessing such unique characteristics, the force of reason suggests that bilingual education may have some relevancy to Indian children. If bilingual education should be held to be relevant, the next major question which then arises is what kind of bilingual program is relevant for these Indian children? The answer to that question is yet to be decided. The bilingual education program mentioned in this paper has already been funded and will become operational in the fall of 1970. It will attempt to follow the bilingual objectives as outlined earlier in this paper. Some modifications are of course expected, particularly when compared to bilingual programs for Spanish-speaking children. The concentration will obviously be on the oral, not the written, native Indian language. Orthographies are yet to be developed, and when they are, as is anticipated, the extent of the written materials will be severely limited, largely confined to pre-primers and primers. A strong English as a second language (ESL) component is also to be incorporated into the bilingual programs, and undoubtedly, ESL will become a major point of focus. The fact that languages such as Crow and Cheyenne continue to exist, particularly to the extent that they do, has both intrigued and confounded many educators. Various reasons can be given in explanation. Physical isolation is of course a factor. Yet, certain -24- Montana tribes such as the Blackfeet were no less isolated than the Crows. Few Blackfeet children, if any, speak Blackfeet today. Another reason given is that certain tribes have more "tenacity” in retaining their cultural identities than do others. Some hold that certain tribes have voluntarily abandoned their languages because tribal members felt it was too much of a handicap to retain the native language. A host of other reasons could be given. Indeed, the fact that one tribe has ceased to speak its language, and another has not, can only be explained by analyzing all the causes. One central factor, however, goes to the heart of the issue of why certain tribes have retained their languages and others haven*t. And this factor has been shaped and is inextricably entwined throughout all the forces which have acted upon Indian reservations. This is the factor of inter¬ marriage or the lack of intermarriage. It makes little difference whether a Crow, for example, marries an Indian from another tribe or a white person. The end result with children from such unions is usually that they will become dominant English speakers. This is because English is the only common language of the home—the parents can usually only communicate to one another in English. Occasionally, the Indian child will be raised in a truly bilingual home environment, i.e., with a balance of both languages spoken. Such a child rarely shows language handicaps and is usually fluent in both -25- languages, In the case where the child*s mother is a dominant Indian speaker, married for example to a white man, there is a good chance that such a child may possess considerable command of the native language along with English. The reverse of this, i.e., the dominant English speaking mother married to an Indian speaking father will rarely result in the child being able to speak much Indian. Or in the case where the child is raised much of the time by his Indian grandparents or other relatives, which is not altogether uncommon with many Indian tribes, he may become a dominant Indian speaker. The peer associations of the young child will also be an influence in his language development, but it will be, normally, his home which will shape his language development the most. Thus, in many respects, it is intermarriage or the lack of it which shapes the destiny of most Indian languages such as the Crow and Cheyenne. The fact that 82% of all Crow children are dominant Crow speakers is mute testimony to the fact that the Crows have done little intermarrying with others CHAPTER III Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations The immediate purpose of the study was to gather certain data, viz., how many Indian students spoke their languages as either a dominant or secondary language, whether or not the Indian languages were diminishing among school age children, census and other related data of the two reservations. These data would be used to substantiate a need for bilingual educational programs should the facts warrant such a need. Once the methods were determined on how to measure the existing bilingual characteristics, who, i.e., what population was to be included in the study, and the other factors under consideration were determined, the next step was to get into each of the reservation area classrooms and conduct the study. Once this was accomplished, the data elicited could then be assembled and analyzed. The study attempted to assess the bilingual characteristics of 3626 students, of whom 2020 were Indian, found in grades one through twelve of the Crow and Northern Cheyenne Reservations area schools. The study revealed the following facts. Eighty-two percent of the Crow students spoke Crow as a dominant language, and 8$ spoke it as a secondary language. This meant that 90% of the Crow speakers were bilinguals. Only 10$ were monolingual English speakers. -27- Of the Northern Cheyenne students, 33% spoke Cheyenne as a dominant language, and lS% spoke it as a secondary language. Thus, 73% of the Cheyenne students were bilinguals, and 2?^ were monolinguala There was no statistical evidence on either reservation to support the contention that the native languages were on the wane. The study showed that the prevalence of dominant Indian speaking did not vary appreciably throughout the different grades. The Indian enrollments on both reservations showed a steady growth. As can be interpreted from the data, the Crow language prevails to a greater extent among Crow school-age children than does the Cheyenne language among Cheyenne students. The degree of bilingualism is high, however, on both reservations, 90% on the Crow and 73% on the Northern Cheyenne. While drawing comparisons between the two reser¬ vations is inevitable, the author would like to stress that each tribe is unique and the reservations differ in many respects. Regardless, however, of the differences which do exist, the incidence of native speaking children is sufficient to warrant serious consideration of a bilingual educational program. Of all the factors affecting the continuation of the native lang¬ uages among the young, intermarriage or the lack of intermarriage is the most significant. If the authorfs analysis is correct, then whether the Indian languages persist is largely beyond the control of the educational -28- community, If this be so, it then becomes a matter for educators to find ways to combat the admitted English deficiencies of many Indian children, in spite of the fact that the schools in the beginning are not reponsible for such deficiencies. Several issues then emerge for the schools to decide. Do or do not the reservation area schools have the responsibility to meet the linguistic needs of Indian children? And if they do, can the use of the Indian languages within the context of the schools be considered part of those linguistic needs? If the schools decide yes, then some form of bilingual education should be introduced into the reservation area schools. Indian languages such as the Crow and Cheyenne will probably cease to exist in the future. When this will occur, no one knows. It may occur several generations from now, perhaps even later. Meanwhile, thousands of Crow and Cheyenne children will continue to come into school with insufficient development in English. ' This will continue to be one of their dilemmas. It will also be a dilemma of the school. The schools will attempt to reconcile the fact of bilingualism, and a great deal of frustration for both the students and the schools will be incurred, just as it has been in the past. Neither is responsible for the language characteristics of the young child. But the schools do have control over what they do when the child is there. There are no easy answers for such difficult -29- questions as what to do with a bilingual child who has insufficient English developed when he comes to school. Bilingual education, while no final answer in itself, may be a positive step towards making education both more palatable and relevant to the Indian child and his school. BIBLIOGRAPHY A. PUBLICATIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT Bilingual Education Act (Title VII) ESEA. Manual for project applicants under Bilingual Education Act. March 20 draft, 1970» B. PERIODICALS Rodriguez, Armando. "The Necessity for Bilingual Education," Wilson Library Bulletin, kk: 72^-30, March, 1970. APPENDIX -32- Explanation of Headings To facilitate rapid review of these data, please make note of the follow¬ ing comments. The headings should be interpreted as: I. = Indian N. I. = Non-Indian Total = the total of the Indian and the non-Indian enrollment by grade and by school. Crow (or Cheyenne) = the number of Crow students, (note, the number of Indians listed under I. may not coincide with the number of students listed under Crow - this means that other tribes are represented) Primary = refers to the language which is spoken at home and which was learned first by the student. The number of students having Crow, for example, as their primary language is shown by the number listed under the heading '’Primary.” Secondary = refers to the Indian language being secondary, the Eng¬ lish language being primary. In this Category are those students who have some conversational and/or listening ability in the Indian language. None = refers to the number of Indian students who do not either speak or understand their tribal language. In other words, these students are monolingual English speakers. TABLE 1 SCHOOL ENROLLMENTS Crow Reservation School Indians Non-Indians Total Enrollment Hardin Public (17-H) 173 1177 1350 Crow Agency (17-H) 225 31 276 Fort Smith (17-H) 22 62 84 17-H Totals 420 1290 1710 Lodge Grass Public 383 126 309 Wyola Public 69 18 87 Edgar Public 48 76 124 St. Xavier Mission 117 9 126 St. Charles Mission 49 2 51 Pryor Public 39 1 4o Totals 1131 153^ r2665 Cheyenne Reservation School Indians Non-Indians Total Enrollment Busby (BIA) 219 4 223 Lame Deer Public 272 27 299 St. Labre Mission 398 4l **39 Totals 889 72 961 Totals - Both Reservations 2020 1606 3626 *Does not include Head Start enrollment figures from either reservation. -34- TABLE 2 TOTAL SCHOOL ENROLLMENTS AND LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS BY GRADES CROW RESERVATION1 p Enrollment Crow Language Charctenstics Grade 1^ N.I. Total Crow Primary Secondary None # Primary 1 163 138 301 162 134 9 19 82 2 124 139 263 122 93 6 23 76 3 108 124 232 106 88 6 12 83 4 130 140 270 127 104 15 8 82 5 95 127 222 91 72 4 15 79 6 104 127 231 102 86 13 3 84 7 95 123 218 93 80 7 6 85 8 66 l4l 20? 63 50 10 3 79 9 73 130 203 72 65 3 4 90 10 67 129 196 65 56 4 5 86 11 38 110 148 36 26 6 4 72 12 49 95 144 44 35 1 8 79 Special Education 19 11 30 19 17 2 Totals 1131 1534 2663 1102 906 86 110 tv611 though Hardin Public Schools and Edgar Public Schools are located off the reservation, they are included in the survey because Crow Indian students make up a significant proportion of the total enroll¬ ment of those schools. 2 Approximately 82% of Crow students speak Crow as a primary language, 8# are secondary speakers, and 10# speak only English. -35- TABLE 3 ENROLLMENT AND LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS BY GRADE Hardin Grades Enrollments Crow Language Characteristics N.I. Total Crow Primary Secondary None First 13 103 116 12 12 Second 10 102 112 9 7 2 Third 8 83 91 7 6 1 Fourth 9 100 109 8 6 2 Fifth 9 86 95 6 3 3 Sixth 5 88 93 5 5 Sub-Total 5^ 362 616 47 38 8 Seventh 13 92 105 11 10 1 Eighth 20 119 139 17 13 4 Sub-Totals 33 211 244 28 23 4 1 Ninth 23 117 l4o 23 22 1 Tenth 30 110 l4o 23 26 2 Eleventh 15 91 106 14 10 1 3 Twelfth 18 86 104 18 13 2 3 Special Ed. 6 11 17 6 6 Sub-Totals 92 415 507 89 77 3 9 Totals 179 1188 us? 164 138 7 18 Percentage speaking Crow as a primary language: Hardin - %k% -36- TABLE 4 ENROLLMENT AND LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS BY GRADE Lodge Grass Grades Enrollments Crow Language Characteristics 1^ N.I. Total Crow Primary Secondary None First 40 12 32 40 34 6 Second 4o 11 31 40 30 2 8 Third 36 13 49 36 31 2 3 Fourth 32 9 61 32 4l 9 2 Fifth 26 13 38 23 18 1 6 Sixth 44 10 34 43 35 6 2 Sub-Totals 238 68 303 236 189 20 27 Seventh 23 14 37 23 17 4 2 Eighth 24 13 37 24 19 4 1 Sub-Totals 47 27 74 47 36 8 3 Ninth 4l 5 46 40 34 3 3 Tenth 26 10 36' 26 19 4 3 Eleventh 13 10 23 13 0 4 Twelfth 18 7 25 17 12 5 Sub-Totals 98 32 130 96 74 11 11 Totals 383 126 309 379 299 39 4l Percentage speaking Crow as a primary language: Lodge Grass - 79$ -37- TABLE 5 ENROLLMENT AND LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS BY GRADE Edgar Grades Enrollments Crow Language Characteristics N.I. Total Crow Primary Secondary Nor First 3 3 Second 4 4 Third 6 6 Fourth 5 5 Fifth 2 9 11 2 2 Sixth 1 7 8 1 1 Sub-Totals ■a; 34 37 3 3 Seventh 1 6 7 1 1 Eighth 1 8 9 1 1 Sub-Totals 2 l4 16 2 2 Ninth 9 8 17 9 9 Tenth 11 9 20 11 11 Eleventh 10 9 19 9 7 1 1 Twelfth 13 2 15 13 13 Sub-Totals 43 28 71 42 4o 1 1 Totals 48 76 124 47 45 1 1 Percentage speaking Crow as a primary language: Edgar - 95$ -38- TABLE 6 ENROLLMENT AND LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS BY GRADES (Fort Smith) Grade Fort Smith and St. Xavier Enrollment Crow Language Characteristics 1^ N.I. Total Crow Primary Secondary None First 6 11 17 6 4 2 Second 3 15 18 3 3 Third 5 k 9 4 4 Fourth 3 12 15 2 2 Fifth 4 10 14 4 4 Sixth 1 10 11 1 1 Totals 22 62 84 20 18 2 (St. Xavier) Grade I. N.I. Total Crow Primary Secondary None First 18 1 19 18 14 2 2 Second 17 17 17 15 2 Third Ik 2 16 14 11 1 2 Fourth Ik 1 15 14 12 2 Fifth 17 2 19 17 14 1 2 Sixth 9 2 11 9 7 2 Seventh 15 1 16 15 15 6 Eighth 13 13 13 ir 2 Totals 117 9 126 117 99 12 -39- TABLE 7 ENROLLMENT AND LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS BY GRADES (St. Charles) St‘ CharleS ^ Fry°r Grade Enrollment Crow Language Characteristics N.I. Total Crow Primary Secondary None First 9 1 10 9 6 3 Second 8 8 8 7 1 Third 8 1 9 8 6 2 Fourth 8 8 8 8 Fifth 6 6 6 5 1 Sixth 5 5 5 4 1 Seventh 5 5 5 4 1 Eighth Totals 49 2 51 49 40 3 6 (Pryor) Grade 1^ N.I. Total Crow Primary Secondary None First 5 5 5 4 1 Second 7 7 7 6 1 Third 9 1 10 9 7 2 Fourth 5 5 5 4 1 Fifth 3 3 3 3 Sixth 1 1 1 1 Seventh 7 7 7 6 1 Eighth 2 2 2 2 Totals 39 1 40 39 33 6 : St. Charles - 80% Pryor - Percentage speaking Crow as a primary language -40- TABLE 8 ENROLLMENT AND LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS BY GRADES (Wyola) Wyola and Crow Agency Grade Enrollment Crow Language Characteristics 1^ N.I. Total Crow Primary Secondary None First 14 2 16 14 10 2 2 Second 12 2 14 12 6 1 5 Third 5 2 7 5 4 1 Fourth 8 5 13 8 3 4 1 Fifth 7 7 7 4 3 Sixth 7 5 12 7 5 2 Seventh 10 1 11 10 8 1 1 Eighth 6 1 7 6 4 2 Totals 69 18 87 69 44 13 12 (Crow Agency) Grade h. N.I. Total Crow Primary Secondary None First 58 5 63 58 50 8 Second 27 5 32 26 19 3 4 Third 23 12 35 23 19 2 2 Fourth 31 8 39 30 28 2 Fifth 21 7 28 21 19 2 Sixth 31 5 36 30 27 3 Seventh 21 9 30 21 19 2 Special Ed. 13 13 13 11 2 Totals 223 51 276 222 192 16 14 Percentage speaking Crow as a primary language: Wyola - 63# Crow Agency - 86# TABLE 9 PERCENT OF INDIAN & NON-INDIAN BY INDIVIDUAL SCHOOLS Crow Reservation Total Enrollment School Grades 1^ N.I. I. N.I. Total Hardin 1-6 10# 90% 54 562 616 7-8 lk% 86# 33 211 244 9-12 lS% 82# 86 404 490 Total Ttyo w, 173 1177 1350 Lodge Grass 1-6 8l# 19% 238 68 305 7-8 (>3% 31% 47 27 74 9-12 23% 98 32 130 13% 23% w 125 509 Wyola 1-8 19% 21# 69 18 87 Crow Agency 1-7 Edgar 80# 20# 225 51 276 1-6 8* 92!% 3 34 37 7-8 13% 81% 2 14 16 9-12 6o# 40# 43 28 71 Total 39% 61# w 76 124 Fort Smith 1 — 6 Z7% 13% 22 62 84 St. Xavier 1-8 92% 8% 117 9 126 St. Charles 1-8 96% 4# 49 2 51 Pryor 1 8> 91% 3% 39 1 40 Reservation Total • 42# 38% 1131 153^ 2665 -42 TABLE 10 ENROLLMENT AND LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS BY GRADES OF CROW STUDENTS IN OUT OF STATE GOVERNMENT BOARDING SCHOOLS Grades Crow Students Crov Language Characteristics Primary Secondary None 1 2 3 4 3 1 1 6 7 6 2 3 1 8 7 5 2 9 15 12 3 10 28 25 1 2 11 29 28 1 12 13 11 1 1 Totals 99 84 11 4 Sk% of Crow boarding students speak Crow as a primary language -43- TABLE 11 TOTAL SCHOOL ENROLLMENTS & LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS BY GRADES NORTHERN CHEYENNE RESERVATION Enrollment Cheyenne Language Characteristics Grades N.I. Total Cheyenne Primary Secondary None % Primary 1 92 12 104 86 40 13 33 48 2 90 7 97 82 39 21 22 49 3 84 11 95 75 38 25 12 50 4 75 4 79 61 31 13 17 50 5 90 6 96 80 54 10 16 67 6 69 7 76 55 27 15 13 50 7 78 8 86 62 34 17 11 54 8 83 4 87 68 43 7 18 63 9 73 3 76 47 31 2 14 64 10 59 3 62 44 27 4 13 60 11 54 3 57 38 21 17 55 12 25 4 29 20 8 6 6 40 Special Ed (St. Labre) 17 17 12 8 4 66 Totals 889 72 961 730 401 133 196 Approximately 55# of the Cheyenne students speak Cheyenne as a primary language, l8# are secondary speakers, and 27% speak only English. -44- TABLE 12 ENROLLMENT AND LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS BY GRADES Busby- Grades Enrollment Cheyenne Language Characteristics LL N.I. Total Cheyenne Primary Secondary None 1 20 20 18 12 1 3 2 9 1 10 7 6 1 3 11 11 11 8 3 4 13 1 14 10 7 2 1 3 19 19 18 14 4 6 11 1 12 8 6 2 7 10 10 7 5 1 1 8 26 26 19 17 2 9 39 29 28 24 4 10 27 27 19 12 2 5 11 26 1 27 21 16 3 12 8 8 6 3 2 1 Totals 219 4 223 173 131 13 29 75* of the Cheyenne students speak Cheyenne as a primary language -45- TABLE 13 INDIANS ENROLLED OTHER THAN CHEYENNE Busby Total Language Characteristics Primary Secondary None 5 2 Tribes Crow Sioux Gros Ventre Cree Blackfeet Arapaho Assiniboine-Cree Assiniboine-Sioux Chippewa Flathead Kootenai Shoshone Totals 7 18 4 3 1 3 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 46 7 11 1 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 18 20 -46- TABLE 14 ENROLLMENT AND LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS BY GRADES AND INDIANS ENROLLED OTHER THAN CHEYENNE Lame Deer Grades Enrollment Cheyenne Language Characteristics 1^ N.I. Total Cheyenne Primary Secondary None 1 8 53 44 17 7 20 2 48 3 51 47 19 13 15 3 39 6 ^5 37 12 14 11 4 33 2 35 28 16 6 6 5 30 2 32 30 16 2 10 6 26 2 28 24 10 8 6 7 27 2 29 29 11 10 2 8 24 __2 26 22 12 3 7 Totals 272 27 299 255 115 63 77 45% of the Cheyenne students speak Cheyenne as a primary languag Tribes Blackfeet Crow Sioux Cherokee Arikara Cree Apache Totals Indians Enrolled Other Than Cheyenne Language Characteristics Number Primary Secondary None 1 1 9 3 1 1 1 1 17 3 3 1 1 2 5 3 1 1 1 12 -47- TABLE 15 ENROLLMENT AND LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS BY GRADES St. Labre Grades Enrollment Cheyenne Language Characteristics 1L N.I. Total Cheyenne Primary Secondary None 1 27 4 31 24 11 5 8 2 33 3 36 28 14 8 6 3 34 5 39 27 18 8 1 4 29 1 30 23 8 5 10 5* 4l 4 45 32 22 8 2 6 32 4 36 23 11 5 7 7 4l 6 4? 32 18 6 8 8 33 2 35 27 14 4 9 9 34 3 37 19 7 2 10 10 32 3 35 25 15 2 8 11 28 2 30 17 5 12 12 17 4 21 14 5 4 5 Special Ed. 17 17 12 8 8 Totals 398 4l 459 303 156 57 90 50# of the Cheyenne students speak Cheyenne as a primary language. -48- TABLE 16 INDIANS ENROLLED OTHER THAN CHEYENNE St, Labre Indian Language Characteristics Tribes Total Primary Secondary None Crow 6l 31 4 26 Arapaho 13 6 7 Southern Cheyenne 1 1 Sioux 14 2 2 10 Pima 1 1 Yakima 1 1 Chippewa 1 1 Klamath 1 1 Totals 93 40 6 47 -49- TABLE 17 PERCENT OF INDIAN & NON-INDIAN BY INDIVIDUAL SCHOOLS Northern Cheyenne Reservation School Grades Percentage Total Enrollment 1^ N.I. 1^ N.I. Total Busby 1-6 96* 4# 83 3 86 i OO 100# 26 26 9-12 99* 1% 100 1 101 Totals 98* 2% 219 4 223 Lame Deer 1-8 90* 10# 272 27 299 St. Labre 1-6 90* 10# 196 21 217 7-8 90* 10# 74 8 82 9-12 90* 10# 111 12 123 Totals 90* 10# 398 4l 439 Reservation Totals 92* 8* 898 72 961