Historically, the goal of schooling for American Indian and other Indigenous students was to assimilate them into the dominant English-speaking American society, with little or no requirement for teachers to understand their students’ backgrounds or to implement culturally responsive teaching methods. This colo­nizing approach has significantly contributed to the persistent achievement gap between Native and white students in the United States. Another key factor in the ongoing achievement gap is the systemic lack of resources and culturally relevant education in schools. Factors such as geographic isolation, economic inequality, and the legacy of assimilation policies worsen these barriers (Martin, 2021).

In contrast to the assimilationist, English-only schooling, Maria T. Tenario, Micki M. Caskey, and Anna Figueira (2022) reviewed extensive research supporting the benefits of culturally responsive schooling for American Indian and Alaska Native youth. Research by Terry Huffman (2020) on American Indian student success pro­vides evidence for the benefits of culturally responsive education that supports students’ linguistic and cultural backgrounds. Les B. Whitbeck, Dan R. Hoyt, Jerry D. Stubben, and Teresa LaFromboise’s (2001) survey of Native students from the upper Midwest reported results similar to Huffman’s on how a firm grounding in one’s ancestral cultural background can help students succeed and overcome racism, discrimination, and other negative aspects of the dominant Euro-American Western culture.

As American Indians gained more control over their children’s education in the 1960s during the era of Indian self-determination, the assimilative education of the past became less common. However, the high-stakes, test-based accountability movement of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 and Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) of 2015 has worked against efforts to Indigenize American Indian education (Reyhner & Eder, 2017).

By comparing the typical one-size-fits-all, standards-based, test-driven, textbook-focused curriculum found in most schools across the United States and Canada with that of tribal college and university (TCU) teacher preparation programs and tribally controlled schools we can gain a greater appreciation for the efficacy of tribally specific, culturally responsive curricula.

***

In 1973, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights released a report titled The Navajo Nation: An American Colony that found Navajo students experienced “an environment controlled and dominated by non-Indians,” and that Navajo language and culture had been largely ignored in the curriculum offered to Navajo students (U.S. Commission, 1973, pp. 126-27). In 1984, the Navajo Tribal Council approved educational policies to improve the quality of education for all Navajos, calling for bilingual-bicultural education (Navajo Division of Education, 1985), and, in 1995, a law was passed to make Navajo language instruction available to all Navajo students.

In 2005, the Navajo Nation Tribal Council passed the landmark Navajo Sovereignty in Education Act, empowering local communities to determine appropriate culturally based curriculum for their schools. Photo by William Nakai, Creative Commons

In 2000, the Office of Diné Culture, Language, and Community Service published T’áá Shá Bik’ehgo Diné Bí Ná Nitin Dóó Íhoo’aah (Diné cultural content standards). Its preface states, “The Diné Cultural Content Standards is predicated on the belief that a strong grounding of native students in their indigenous cultural heritage and language is a fundamentally sound prerequisite to well-devel­oped and culturally healthy students.” The empowering values for Diné individuals to learn include being “generous and kind,” “respecting kinship,” “being a careful listener,” and “having a balanced perspective and mind,” as well as not being lazy, impatient, hesitant, easily hurt, shy, or mad. Diné individuals are expected to respect the sacred, practice self-discipline, and prepare for challenges.

In 2005, the Navajo Nation passed the Navajo Sovereignty in Education Act (NSEA), which states, in part:

Courses or course content that develops knowledge, understanding and respect for Navajo culture, history, civics and social studies shall be included in the curriculum of every school serving the Navajo Nation. The local school governing boards, in consultation with parents, students and the local community, shall assist in determining the appropriate course content for the Navajo culture component of the curriculum. (Navajo, 2005, p. 14)

Mainstream universities, both nearby and distant, have supported the Navajo Nation’s decolonization efforts. For example, Arizona State University’s Center for Indian Education has published the Journal of American Indian Education, featuring numerous articles on Navajo education. Its other publications include Ancita Benally’s A Handbook for Teachers of Navajo Children: Training for All Teachers (2005) and David Beaulieu and Anna Figueira’s The Power of Native Teachers: Language and Culture in the Classroom (2006). Northern Arizona University’s Diné Institute for Navajo Nation Educators currently provides professional development for teachers in Navajo-serving schools. Students in the program have created over 100 curriculum units for early childhood through 12th grade, available online on topics such as water is life, four foods of hózhó, integrating traditional and Western values, peacemaking, and many others, all freely accessible. Northern Arizona University also hosts the American Indian/Indigenous Teacher Education Conference and the Stabilizing Indigenous Languages Symposium, which features Navajo language programs and policies.

Perhaps the biggest step toward decolonization came with the establishment of Diné College, formerly known as Navajo Community College (NCC) in 1968 as the first tribal college. Since its founding, it has worked to address issues highlighted by the U.S. Civil Rights Commission and to help implement the Navajo Nation’s laws and policies. Owing to the high turnover of non-Native teachers in both public and Bureau of Indian Education schools, teacher education was among the first programs NCC offered. One of the main target groups that these programs served was the large number of experienced Diné teacher aides and substitute teachers who were interested in advancing their careers.

In the 1960s and the 1970s, the federal government also funded teacher education programs as part of its anti-poverty efforts, and many NCC students benefited from them. Virginialee Jackson (1974) examined alternative teacher training approaches offered to NCC students. One of these, funded under the Educational Professions Development Act of 1967, was part of the Career Opportunities Program (COP) designed to “train individuals who possess the ability and the desire to provide enhanced educational opportunities for children of low-income families.” The COP program at NCC offered 64 credit hours of instruction (Jackson, 1974) aimed at providing “competency-based teacher education programs” with a “field-centered” curriculum.

With the establishment of Navajo Community College in 1968, culturally responsive curricula became a cornerstone of tribally controlled higher education. Photo courtesy of Diné College

Diné College’s teacher education program has aligned with the Navajo Nation’s decolonization of education laws and policies. It promotes the Diné philosophy of education, approved by the Navajo Nation Tribal Council in 2001. “[T]he standards are intended to instruct Diné students about the history, language, oral and written literature, science, philosophy, and geography taught by their ancestors to inspire each student to exercise his or her role in society for the betterment of self, family, and community as exem­plified and encompassed in the Diné concept of Sa’ah Naaghái Bike’eh Hózhóón [living in balance with all that exists between the universe and earth]” (Navajo, 2001, p. iv).

As stated on its website, Diné College’s School of Diné Studies and Education is currently working to train “respectful, effective teachers” who “will use Navajo teachings with all students.” Diné College offers both an Associate of Arts degree with courses in Navajo history and another course titled, Foundations of Navajo Culture. Additionally, the college’s Bachelor of Arts program includes courses in bilingual education and teaching English as a second language.

***

The late Lionel Bordeaux, the long-serving president of Sinte Gleska University, declared, “These founders [of tribal colleges] foresaw the need to preserve the Indian culture, so cultural preser­vation is really the foundation of the tribal colleges” (Bordeaux, 1991, p. 12). Today, the goal of teacher preparation at all TCUs is to incorporate tribal perspectives, languages, and cultures to signifi­cantly improve teaching quality and, consequently, to promote highly effective learning for Native students. Improving outcomes for schools serving tribal communities depends on creating cultur­ally responsive learning environments. This involves integrating relevant elements throughout the entire school system such as board policies, curriculum, teaching methods, and administrative practices. A key part of this approach is providing schools with qualified teaching staff, including professional development in culturally responsive teaching and leadership. Significant efforts include developing culturally relevant educational resources, training educators in these methods, and supporting schools with recruitment planning to ensure the quality of staff, especially in teaching and administrative roles. Furthermore, these efforts aim to base education practices on research-informed tribal knowledge and cultural foundations. For example, Ryan Chee, principal at Leupp Elementary School within the Flagstaff Unified School District, noted that administrators should provide coaching to today’s school personnel to serve as school-tribal-community leaders, rather than just as academic leaders, thereby bridging the gap between schools and tribal communities and prioritizing the nation-building goals supported by local stakeholders (personal interview, January 18, 2024).

Teacher training at TCUs can be viewed differently from that at traditional mainstream institutions. Unlike conventional metrics such as accreditation, financial assistance, enrollment numbers, and graduation statistics, TCUs emphasize a comprehensive approach grounded in tribal values, cultural heritage, and commu­nity well-being. They focus on Native culture and language revitalization, serving as cultural centers while also promoting community involvement and leadership development. Additionally, supporting Native students involves providing support for their well-being, helping them achieve personal and professional goals, and fostering a sense of belonging. Unlike most mainstream institutions, TCUs’ efficacy reflects tribal sovereignty and recognizes tribes’ inherent right to self-governance and cultur­ally relevant education. TCUs’ main goal is to develop a skilled workforce and promote economic self-determination by aligning skills training in support of tribal nation-building and in-demand fields. Teacher education is a central element of this mission.

The significance of researching the influence of TCU leadership on K-12 schools, colleges, and universities was underscored by Andrew Tah, the longest-serving superintendent of education for the Department of Diné Education (personal interview, January 25, 2025). Tah emphasized the critical need to expand leadership capacity within TCUs to strengthen these institutions. When asked about leadership and accountability in K-12 schools, TCUs, and post-secondary institutions, he stressed that educational institu­tions located in reservation communities also face pressures from tribal, state, and national policies regarding accountability for assessment, curriculum, and related higher education standards. For example, to gain accreditation from the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) and comply with American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC) standards, TCUs must complete a multi-step process. Accreditation involves fulfilling tribal sanctioning and eligibility requirements, followed by achieving candidacy via a comprehensive self-evaluation and peer review process. Adherence to HLC standards, AIHEC requirements, and tribal mandates is continuously monitored, respecting the unique mission and context of TCUs. Since Diné educational institutions are culturally and historically situated within a complex interplay among federal, state, and tribal policies, education leaders are compelled to be knowledgeable about how tribal ways of knowing, being, and leading influence today’s education system. Amid contemporary pressures, challenges, and complexities, education leaders are expected to navigate current policies while acknowl­edging the ongoing legacy of colonialism.

To address the short tenure of exceptional educators in the system, including those from within the community, Tah advocates for an increased Native voice and participation within schools and insti­tutions. This is essential for creating culturally relevant spaces and fostering a positive school environment for American Indian and Alaska Native children. He noted that while cultivating local talent and “growing your own” shows promise, more research is needed to evaluate the impact on student and teacher outcomes. Strengthening partnerships among TCUs, tribal education depart­ments, and post-secondary institutions can raise awareness of Native student achievement by sharing best practices and research. A more proactive leadership approach from all entities is crucial to advancing these efforts. For instance, TCUs and other educational institutions serving tribal communities originate from various philosophical and institutional backgrounds. Nonetheless, they have shared goals such as integrating cultural values and robust land connections into their curricula, and prioritizing com­munity outreach and education centered on tribal identity and practices. Therefore, a stronger partnership among these entities is key.

***

Since the mid-1980s, standards-based reform has been a central focus of education policy for both federal and state governments. To qualify for federal funding, such as Title I, NCLB, and ESSA, schools are required to meet state academic standards and assess student achievement through standardized tests (Flandro, 2023; Glass et al., 2020). However, this approach has increased stress among teachers, resulting in high turnover and shortages (Tenorio et al., 2022; Garcia & Weiss, 2019; Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017). Studies have shown that standardization harms Native American children’s academic success by producing invalid results due to cultural and linguistic biases in tests, ignoring different learning styles, and overlooking systemic factors that create achievement gaps. When these standardized reform strategies are implemented in Native schools, they create benchmarks for what students learn, how they are taught, how their performance is assessed, and the standards they must meet for promotion and graduation (Tenorio et al., 2022; Anthony-Stevens et al., 2020). For TCUs, overemphasizing standardized curriculum and assessment damages TCUs and Native children’s education by censoring Native history and culture, disrupting culturally relevant teaching, and reducing opportunities for critical thinking and self-identity. If NCLB and ESSA had genuinely improved test scores and closed the achievement gap between non-Asian minorities and white students, then the stress might be justified. However, that has not been the case (Ravitch, 2020).

Research shows that revitalizing Native culture has positive effects on the health and well-being of students and communities. Here, tribal college students at Northwest Indian College prepare to launch a traditional Lummi canoe. Photo by LeRoy Grafe

It must be recognized that the American education system was never designed for today’s world. It was created during a time when conformity, rather than creativity, was the primary focus. Back then, preparing students for factory jobs made sense, and obedience was valued over curiosity. But just as most Generation Z and Generation Alpha never entered the factory industry, neither have our Native American children. They are entering a world of constant change where mental health issues and existential questions are common.

Our education system hasn’t kept pace, and now the problems are becoming clear. According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, reading and math scores among 13-year-olds are the lowest in decades. The Centers for Disease Control reports that nearly 40% of high school students feel persistent sadness or hopelessness, a sharp rise over the past 10 years (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2023). These are not isolated issues but signs of a flawed system. Yet, the main measures we use to evaluate success in Indian education focus on standardized tests and academic standards. These measures don’t show whether a student can manage stress, think critically, or build meaningful relationships. The current education system often suppresses those skills.

The biggest issue with top-down-mandated schools isn’t just what they teach but what they overlook. Schools should prepare students for life, but if one asks most Native high school students if they feel ready for adulthood, they will probably get a blank stare. That’s why “reaching personal goals” and “boot camp 101” classes, covering everything from budgeting to emotional regulation, are growing in popularity. Students are craving practical, real-world education. Native students also show an interest in and connection to their Indigenous languages and cultures (McCarty et al., 2009), which TCUs can build upon. Research shows that revitalizing Indigenous language and culture has positive effects on the health and well-being of Indigenous communities (Harding et al., 2025).

We need to stop viewing schools simply as places to fill students’ minds with facts. Instead, there should be spaces where they can discover who they are and why they matter. When we reduce kids to test scores, we limit their future potential. To close achievement gaps, we must focus on identity development, emotional resilience, and purpose. A purpose-driven school model, combined with place-based and cultural responsiveness, emphasizes personalized, meaningful learning experiences tailored to each student’s strengths, interests, and values, especially for at-risk learners. If they are interested in pursuing a career as a physician, educator, rancher, or traditional medicine healer, the necessary coursework and knowledge will become clear as they progress.

We have cultivated a culture of uniformity that shapes our education system. From the U.S. Department of Education to the Bureau of Indian Education, the emphasis has been on promoting sameness rather than focusing on meaningful content. Too often educational reforms involve minor adjustments, such as changing testing methods, updating curriculum standards, or modifying funding policies, without addressing the core issues about how to educate children so they can lead a good life. To improve educa­tion, a shift in mindset is necessary to redesign schools around human development rather than industrial production, thereby linking teaching to the existing strengths and positive trends within tribal communities and their students (Martin, 2021). TCUs offer an alternative to the mainstream education model, as they focus on the cultures and needs of the communities they serve.

Once upon a time at a National Tribal Chairman’s Association conference, Wendell Chino, the late chairman of the Mescalero Apache Nation, cautioned tribal leaders about turning educational institutions into factories. He urged them to see schools as commu­nities, noting that communities nurture, challenge, and shape character but factories do not (personal interview with Andrew Tah, January 25, 2025). Today, TCUs stand out from mainstream institutions by providing quality education while safeguarding and promoting Indigenous culture, language, and traditions. They are recognized for creating a caring, family-like environment that supports student success. The key question is whether we will limit and commercialize access to education or uphold a college education as a public commitment to each student, rooted in dignity and a sense of belonging.

Joseph Martin, EdD (Diné) is a professor of education and the principal investigator for the American Indian School Leadership Program at Northern Arizona University; Timothy Timothy Begaye, EdD (Diné) is the vice-president for academic affairs at Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute; and Jon Reyhner, EdD is a professor of education at Northern Arizona University.

Disclaimer: The views expressed do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Interior or the United States government.

REFERENCES

Anthony-Stevens, V., Jones, J., & Begay, V. (2020). Regenerating Teacher Education Programs with Indigenous Knowledge in Idaho. Northwest Journal of Teacher Education, 15(3), 3.

Beaulieu, D, & Figueira, A.M. (Eds.). (2006). The Power of Native Teachers: Language and Culture in the Classroom. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University Center for Indian Education.

Benally, A. (Ed.). (2005). A Handbook for Teachers of Navajo Children: Training for All Teachers. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University Center for Indian Education.

Bordeaux, L. (1991). Higher Education from the Tribal College Perspective. In D. LaCounte and P. Weasel Head (Eds.), Opening the Montana Pipeline: American Indian Education in the Nineties (pp. 11-18). Sacramento, CA: Tribal College Press.

Carver-Thomas, D., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher Turnover: Why It Matters and What We Can Do about It. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.

Flandro, C. (2023). Urgent Disparities Persist in Native American Education, and State Efforts to Help Have Been Underwhelming. Idaho Education News. Retrieved from https://www.idahoednews.org/features/native-american-students/urgent-disparities-persist-in-native-american-education-and-state-efforts-to-help-have-been-underwhelming/

Garcia, E., & Weiss, E. (2019). U.S. Schools Struggle to Hire and Retain Teachers. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved from https:// files.epi.org/pdf/ 164773.pdf

Glass, G., Mathis, W.J., & Berliner, D. (2020). NEPC Review: Student Assessment During COVID 19. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.

Harding, L. DeClaire, R., Ellis, U. Delaurier-Lyle, K. Schilo, J. & Turin, M. (2025). Language Improves Health and Wellbeing in Indigenous Communities: A Scoping Review. Language and Health 3, 1-16.

Huffman, T. (2020). Transculturation Theory: A Framework for Understanding Tribal Identity and Academic Success. In J. Reyhner, J. Martin, L. Lockard, & W.S. Gilbert (Eds.), Honoring Our Students (pp. 87-110). Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University.

Jackson, V.D. (1974). A Descriptive Study of Teacher Education Programs for Navajo Indian Students. Education Document Reproduction Service (ED 092 296).

Martin, J. (2021). Culture and Power in Preparing Leaders for American Indian/Alaskan Native Schools. In J.W. Tippeconnic & M.J. Tippeconnic (Eds.), On Indian Ground: Southwest (pp. 247-264). Charlotte, NC: Information Age

McCarty, T.L., Romero-Little, M.E., Warhol, L., & Zepeda, O. (2009). Indigenous Youth as Language Policy Makers. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 8, 291-306.

Navajo Division of Education. (1985). Navajo Nation Education Policies. Window Rock, AZ: Navajo Nation.

Navajo Nation Council. (2005). Navajo Sovereignty in Education Act. CJY-37-05 Resolution of the Navajo Nation Council 20.

Division of Diné Education. (2001). Navajo Nation Education Standards with Navajo Specifics. Window Rock, AZ: Division of Diné Education, Office of Diné Culture, Language and Community Services.

Office of Diné Culture, Language, & Community Service, Division of Diné Education. (2000). T’áá Shá Bik’ehgo Diné Bí Ná nitin dóó Íhoo’aah [Diné Cultural Content Standards]. Window Rock, AZ: Navajo Nation.

Ravitch, D. (2020). Slaying Goliath: The Passionate Resistance to Privatization and the Fight to Save America’s Public Schools. New York: Knopf.

Reyhner, J., & Eder, J. (2017). American Indian Education: A History, 2nd ed. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Tenorio, M.T., Caskey, M.M., & Figueira, A. (2022). Sustaining the Circle: Native Teacher Preparation and Retention. In C.D. Gist & T.J. Bristol (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Teachers of Color and Indigenous Teachers (pp. 889-908). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2023). Youth Risk Behavior Survey. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/yrbs/results/2023-yrbs-results.html

U.S. Commission of Civil Rights. (1973). The Navajo Nation: An American Colony. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

Whitbeck, L.B., Hoyt, D.R., Stubben, D.R., & LaFromboise, T. (2001). Traditional Culture and Academic Success among American Indian Children in the Upper Midwest. Journal of American Indian Education, 40(2), 48-60.