DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 343 756 RC 018 615

AUTHOR Hillabrant, Walter; And OthersTITLE Native American Education at a Turning Point: Current

Demographics and Trends.SPONS AGENCY Department of Education, Washington, DC. Indian

Nacions At Risk Task Force.PUB DATE 91NOTE 12p.; In: Indian Nations At Risk Task Force

Commissioned Papers. See RC 018 612.PUB TYPE Information Analyses (070)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Adult Education; *Alaska Natives; *American Indian

Education; *American Indians; *Demography;Educational Attainment; Elementary SecondaryEducation; Enrollment; *Enrollment Trends; *FinancialSupport; Geographic Distribution; Higher Education;Population Growth; Population Trends; SpecialEducation; Vocational Education

ABSTRACTThis paper discusses demography, statistics, and

trends related to Native American education and makes projections forthe year 2000. Based on linear regressions of earlier census data,projections for 1990 and 2000 include: (1) fast population growth forAmerican Indians and Alaska Natives; (2) population growth shifts tourban areas; (3) an increas:aig aged population as well as a growingschool aged population; (4) changes in distribution among the statesof the Native population and tribes; (5) increasing but still laggingbehind educational attainment; (6) low labor force participation; (7)high poverty rates; (8) high mortality rates among young people; (9)varying but overall increasing enrollments for public, private, andBureau of Indian Affairs schools; (10) low enrollment in highereducation and limited major fields of study in management and socialsciences; (11) overall growing enrollments in adult education,vocational education, vocational rehabilitation, and specialprograms; (12) some gains in Native scores on the Scholastic AptitudeTest and the American College Testing Program; (13) dropout rates;(14) fluctuating but overall increasing educational.attainment; (15)varying educational funding but decreasing federal aid; and (16)teacher turnover, attrition, and salaries as major problems. Thispaper contains 30 references. (SV)

***********************************************************************Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

from the original document.***********************************************************************

Native American Education at a Turning Point:Current Demographics and Trends

Walter Hillabiant, Ph.D., Mike Romano,David Stang, Ph.D., Support Services, Inc.

and Ince Charleston, Ph.D.

PrefaceCounting the numbers ofAmerican Indians and

Alaska Natives is difficult. Often the count is af-fected by such factors as who collect& the data, themethod of data collection, and the perceived objec-tives of the data collection effort. For example, thenumber of American Indians and Alaska Nativesreported in the 1980 census represented a 72 per-cent increase over the 1970 census. The CensusBureau estimathd that a significant proportion ofthe increase was attributable to factors other thannatural population increase (births minus deaths).Some of the growth was attribated to use of self-identification for obtaining information pertainingto race (Johnson, Pai-eno, & Levin, 1988). In anyevent, different defin.dons, procedures and effortstend to produce different counts. In this paper, wehave used the available data, regardless of source(e.g., Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department ofEducation, Bureau of Indian Affairs) without con-firming the validity of the count.

Despite the variety of sources, the datapresented in this paper, especially when presentedin the context of trends over many years, some-times over decades, seems to have a stuprisingdegree of consistency.

In this paper, we focus on the present situationand what we expect to see in the remainder of thedecade, to the year 2000. In order to project to liefilture, we have examined trends over the past. Wehave often summarized such trends using linearregression. This approach determines the straightline that best fits the known data points andprojecting the line to estimate future data points.For much of the data examined in this paper, weprovide fi forecast for the year 2000. It is important(1Jto note that these forecasts are often based on onlya few years of data. Furthermore, data available

CO for Native students are often derived from smalland/or poor samples. Unfortunately, it is the bestwe have available on Native populations. We can-not over emphasize the need for better quality datafor Native populations. Despite these limitations,it is important to make an attempt to describe

U.S DEPARTMENT Of EDUCATIONDace co Eclocabonai Research and Improvement

EDUCALONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCE.NTER IERICI

dOcument hale Dein reproduced asreceived trom the person or copanitahdhoriginating it

0 Minor changes ht a Wan to ImPloyreproduction Quality

Points of view w opinions Stated in thtlICIOCIa,ment do not necessarily repreeent OrvalOERI position or POO'

current trends, and to project where they will be in10 years in the year 2000.

One big problem with demographic and statis-tical analyses is that ifyou cannot assign a numberto something, you cannot analyse it. Thus in thispaper, we spend most of our time discussing chan-ges in the quantity, rather than the quality ofNative education. Quality issues are often muchmore important than the issues of quantity.

The statistically-inclined reader might like thknow more about our data. For anyone wishing touse the data underlying the findiugs presented inthis paper, we hope to make an automated fileavailable (through ERIC), which contains a publicdomain regression program and all the databasesused in this report, along with MS DOS files con-taining all the results. This information will beprovided separately because the data and analysesexceed 50 pages. Too much technical detail canobscure the most important facts, which will be thefocus of this paper.

At the time this paper was completed (early1991), the 1990 census reports for American In-dians and Alaska Natives were generally unavail-able to the public. As a result, Li most fif ouranalyses based on census data, figures for 1990 areestimates based on linear regressions of data fromearlier vensusec. When the 1990 census data be-come available, they will be a good test of theaccuracy of our estimates. It is noteworthy %et thedemographic, social, and economic characteristicsof American Indian tribes from the 1980 censusdata were reloased in a Ceribas Bureau Publicationin February, 1990, a full decade after the censuswas completed.

Demographics of the NativePopulation

Overall Plpulation GrowthThe numbers of American Indians and Alaska

Natives are growing, and growing fast. The 1980census showed almost 1.4 million American In-dians and over 64,000 Alaska Natives. Our projec-

BEST COPY AVAILABLE 1 2

Indians Nations At Risk: Solutions for the 1990e

Mons show a population of over 1.6 millionAmerican Indians in 1990, and almost two millionin the year 2000. Similarly, we project over 72,000Alaska Natives in 19e0 and over 82,000 in theyear2000, Despite the significant growth in the Nativepopulation, in 1980 it represented less than onepercent of the total U.S. population, and, if irprojections are correct, this percentage will notchange much by the year 2000.

The Shift to CitiesA starting point for discussion of the demog-

raphy of Native education might be to note thesteady growth of the Native population in urbanrelative to rural areas, not in every state, but as ageneral trend. Table 1 shows the 10 states with thehighest Native population in the 1980 census, andshows the trend of high urban population growthover the 'past 30 years. The figures in Table 1 arein thousands of persons.

Table 2 provides a summary for the 10 statescompared in Table 1. We can see that while theNative population is growing in the rural areas ata rate of nearly 7,500 per year, growth in the urbanareas is nearly double that rate. As recently as the1970 census, rural areas accounted for more Na-tives in these states. In 1991, the urban areas leadin Native population, and even by the year 2000,the rural areas will not have as many Native in-habiteats as currently dwell in the urban areas [39,40]. [Note: Numbers in square brackets refer to theanalysis file number in which these detailedrtsulta may be found].

A number of problem s are raised by the increas-ing distribution of Native students in urban com-munities. For example, understanding thestudent's culture, learning style, and special needsmay be more difficult when the number of Nativestudents is small compared to the total studentenrolhnent of a particular school or school district.Because Natives constitute less than one percentof the U.S. population, a Native student residingin an urban community is often the only Nativestudent in a class. There may be less than a dozenNative students in the school or even the entiredistrict. Furthermore, other Native students maybe from very different, even traditionally hostile,tribes or groups. In such circumstances, it is easyfor the Native student to feel out of place and forthe system to fail to meet the student's specialneeds.

Age DistributionsDramatic growth has occurred both in the

Native population as a whole, and in the numbersof school-aged Native youth. Table 3, taken from

2

U.S. mew data from several decades, shows thisgrowth. Prom 1950 to 1970, the number ofNativesaged 0 to 20 years doubled. Prom 1970 to 1980, italmost doubled again. By 1990, we estimate therewill be 344,225 Native children aged 0-9 years; bythe year 2000, there will be and estimated 408,163Native children eged 0-9 years. Similarly, by 1990,we estimate there will be 378,012 Natives aged10-19 years; by 2000 there will be 456,500 Nativesin this age group. While these projections must bethated with special caution because they arelined on only the data from the 1950, 1970, and1980 censuses, they certainly suggest that therewill be large increases in the Native studentpopulation over the nest decade. We will have amuch better estimate of this growth when the 1990census data becomes available. If educators do notplan for this substantial growth, it is unlikely thatbig improvements in the educational outcomes ofNative students can be achieved.

At the same time, we must recognize that theNative population is aging. Those 0-20 years oldconstituted 51 percent of the population in 1950,49 percent in 1970, and just 43 percent in 1980.

These two trends, a substantial increase in thenumber of school-age Natives, and an increase inthe average age of the Native population should behicluded in plans for improving Native education.

Distribution of the NativePopulation

A synopsis of the general Native populationdemography was provided by the 1980 census: 25percent of American Indians lived or. reservations,2 percent lived on tribal trust lands, 36 percentlived in other rural areas, and the remaining 37percent lived in urban areas in the United States.Based on the trend for more rapid populationgrowth in urban areas, we anticipate that the 1990and year 2000 censuses will show higher percent-ages of Natives living in ufban areas.

The analysis of current Native demographyshould include identification of the largest reser-vations in terms of population. The Special Reportfrom the 1980 Census, American Indians, Es-kimos, and Aleuts on identified Reservations andin the Historic Areas of Oklahoma contains a ligeing of about 250 reservations nationwide, listingvarious serial and economic factors associated witthe reservations. Table 4 presents a list of the 10most populous reservations in the United States,drawn from the 1980 special report. Arizona con-tains part or all of siz out of the 10 largest reserva-tions, with the states of South Dakota and NewMexico also containing more than one. The NavajoNation with over 100,000 residents is clearly the

3

Demographics

largest reservation, over eight times morepopulous than Pine Ridge with over 11,000 Og lalaSioux residents.

The population trends of the 10 states withlargest numbers of American Indians are shown inTable 5. In 1940, Oklahoma had the largeatAmerican Indian population, with Arizona jadingin 1950 and 1960. Oklahoma regained the lead in1970. And finally, California took first place in1980. In fact, California hu moved from sixthplace in 1940, th fifth place in 1950, to fourth placein 1960, to third place in 1970, and to first place in1980 where it will likely remain in the 1990 census,as shown in the projections for 1990 and 2000.These figures also retlent the greater Nativepopulation increase of urban relative to ruralareas. For example, in California the majority ofthe Native population resides in urban areas.

While there are more than 500 American In-dian tribes and Alaska Native Villages, 10 groupsof tribes account for more than half the Nativepopulation. Enrollment in each tribe is determinedby the tribe, and generally involves some degree ofblood quantum and direct descendence from ear-lier tribal members. In 1980, only two tribes(Cherokee and Navajo) had more than 100,000members. Note that the Census Bureau combineddata from r number of distinct but culturally-re-lated tribes for most of the categories in Table 6.

Tribal enrollment is not lost when membersmigrate to other locations. However, eligibility forcertain services (e.g., many services from theBureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the IndianHealth Service (INS)) may be unavailable to mem-bers living away from the designated service areas.For a few tribes, the right to vote in tribal electionsmay be denied to members while living away fromthe reservation or trust lands. The members of atribe often reside in many states.

Social and EconomicCharacteristics of Native Americans

The social, economic, and health problemsreflected in this section are critical to the successof efforts to improve Native education. Somehow,these efforts must overcome the effects of highlevels of unemployment, poverty, and healthproblems described below.

Educational AttainmentCensus data indicate that the educational at-

tainment of American Indians improved sig-nificantly in the 1970s. In 1980, 56 percent ofAmerican Indians aged 25 and over had completedfour years of high school, up from 33 percent in1970. Nevertheless, the 56 percent of Natives with

Hillabrant, Romano, Stang & Charleston

four years of high school was still significantlylower than the 6' percent for the tutal U.S. popula-tion. The educational attainment of Alaska Na-tives was even lower than that of AmericanIndians: 46 percent of Alaska Natives 25 years orolder had completed high school in 1980 (Johnson,et al, 19118).

Labor Force ParticipationThe labor force is defined as employed persons

plus persons actively looking tbr work. The 1980census showed that American Indians did not par-ticipate in the labor force to the same degree as thetotal population: 59 percent of American Indians16 years old and over were in the labor force com-pared to the 62 percent for the total population.The situation was even worse for Alaska Native,:less than 50 percent of Alaska Natives were in thelabor force in 1980 (Johnson, et al, 1988).

Poverty RatesIn 1979, the poverty line was defined by the

federal government as an income of not more than$7,412 (excluding non-cash benefits such as hous-ing, food, or medical assistance) for a family of four.In 1979, 28 percent of American Indians and 25percent of Alaska Natives were below the povertyline. In contrast, 12 percent of the total populationwas below the poverty line (Johnson, et al, 1988).Table 7 presents a comparison of the Native andtotal populations on a variety of social andeumomic characteristics. Table 7 shows the Nativepopulation to be younger, and to have largerfamilies, lower per capita income, more personsbelow the poverty line, lower proportion of' highschool graduates, and to have more unemployedthan the total populations (IHS Trends in IndianHealth, 1990).

Mortality RatesNatives generally die younger than other

Americans. Table 8 shows the top 10 causes ofdeath for 1-14 year olds (1985-1987). Nativechildren die at higher rates in every case except forcancer (malignant neoplasms) and birth defects(congenital abnormalities); the mortality rates areequivalent for meningitis. Similar patterns arefound in the mortality rates of Natives aged 15-24years.

Enrollment TrendsK-12 Enrollment

The Native student population is distributedamong three major types of schools for the K-12grades: public schools, private schools, and schools

3 4

Indians Nations M Risk: Solutions for the 1990s

administered by the dureau of Indian Affairs(BIA). There are several other types of school,including reservation schools administered locally,and a few eaperimental or specialty schools. How-ever, the majority of Native students, 85 percent,currently attend public schools, with BIA andprivate schools still enrolling significant nundrilof students.

In 1990, the BIA directly operated 102 schoelsand provided funds for 78 contract schooleunderthe Indian Self-Determination and Education As-sistance Act (Pub.L 93-838). Since 1970, enroll-mint in BIA-operated schools has been decreasingwhile enrollment in Contract schools has beenincreasing. When these two seta of data are com-bined, the total enrollment for BIA-funded schoolshas been increasing sliently (see Figure 1). It isnoteworthy that the drAta in Figure 2 (from BIAstatistics concerning Indian Education, FY 1952-1979) are at variance with other BIA datapresented in Educating the American In-dian/Alaska Maive Family: 16th Annual Reportof the National Aduisory Council on Indian Educa-tion (NACIE). The BIA data reported by NACIEindicate an average annual decrease of 715 stu-dents in BIA-ffinded schools.

Figure 2 shows the enrollment trends of Nativestudents in public, private, and BIA-fundedschools since 1970. It also shows the total enroll-ment of all students. Note that the total studentdata are in millions, and the rest of the data are inthousands.

Enrollment of Native students in U.S. publicand private schools has been increasing at a rateof about 7,200 students per year (Table 9). By theyear 2000, we project there will bo nearly half amillion Native students enrolled in these schools.(01)

The net effect of this large increase in the publicand private schools and small loss in the BIP.funded schools is an overall increase in the numberof Native students, grades K-12. [03] In contrast,total student enrollments in grades K-12 in theUnited States have been decreasing over the last10 years. Each year, there is an average of 340,000fewer students in our schools. (04)

Table 10 shows the enrollment of Native stu-dents (elementary through secondary levels) inrelation to the total student population, for the 10states with the largest Native populations. It isinteresting to note that California, althoughhaving the highest Native population, is not evenamong the top 10 states in terms of the percentageof Native student enrollment. This means that*Moto* California has the largest total popula-tion of' Natives, the density of Native student

4

population in the schools is far less than in otherstates where large numbers of Natives live.

Higher EducationIn institutions of higher education, Native stu-

dent enrollment has been increasing at a rate of'over 1,100 students per year, about 1.2 percent oftheir current enrollment COM. The total U.S. enroll-ment is increasing at about the same rate: 1.5percent per year (NCES, 1989). OW Sinoe 1976,there ha .:. been no change in Native enrollment asei percentage of all students enrolled in highereducation, (07) By the year 2000, we project thatover 100,000 Native students will be enrolled inhigher education programs (see Table 11)..

Beginning in 1988, a new era in Native educa-tion commenced with the opening of Navikjo Com-munity College in Arizona, the firsttribally-controlled college to grant a 2-year as-sociate degree located on the reservation. Sincethen, a total of 24 tribally-controlled communitycolleges have been established (all located on reser-vations, except for two). These tribally-controlledcolleges are helping Native students preserve theircultural identity while at the same time embarkingon fields of study which allow them to attain profes-sional goals (see Commissioned Paper 18 of theSupplemental Volume).

In 1989, the total enrollment of the tribally-con-trol l ed colleges was about 4,400 students(American Indian Higher Education Consortium,1990). Figure 3 shows the enrollments in the tribalcolleges from 1981 to 1989 with projections. Weproject that in 1990 enrollment will be 4,390, andin the year 2000 it will be over 7,500 students. Thecolleges are concentrated in a few states. Out of thetotal of24 colleges, seven are in Montana and eigh tin the states of North Dakota and South Dakota.Many of the larger reservations do not have sucha college. A state with one of the largest popula-tions in the country, Oklahoma, is without a tribalcollege; California, Arizona, and New Mexico eachhave only one.

Two of the tribal colleges now grant 4-yeardegrees: Oglala Lakota and Sinte Gleska. In a listof the top 10 4-year colleges in terms of Nativestudent enrollment, Oglala Lakota College isranked third with 812 Native students, having thehonor of being the only tribnlly-controlted collegeranking in the top 10 (Chronicle of Higher Educa-tion, April 11, 1990).

A recent tabulation of Native students in thcvarious higher education levels was published inthe Chronicle of Hik,ther Education, April 11, 1990.Table 12, adapted from this report, shows data over

Demographics

the 1978-1988 decade by student gender, typeinstitution, and type of program.

In the first professional programs, such asmedicine and law, there has been no increase inNative student enrollment over the 10 year period.On the graduate level, there has been significantincrease, but not nearly enough to keep up !Rh theincrease in Native population shown in Table 1.Enrollment of women is consistently greater thanthat of men at all levels.

Table 13 shows that the m gjority ofNative (andHispanic) students are enrolled at 2-year colleges.In contrut, the percentages of Asian, Black, andWhite students enrolled in 4-year colleges is higherthan that enrolled in 2-year colleges. Figure 4shows the trend of Native student enrollment in2-year and 4-year colleges for the period 1976-1986.

MAjor Fields of StudyTable 14 indicates the interest areas and the

mejor fields of study of Native college students. Inill fields, Native students earned 0.4 percent of allBachelors Degrees, with Native women studentsearning slightly more such degrees than Nativemen students.

3f the major fields of study, the greatest num-ber of degrees awarded (to all categories of stu-dents) were in business and management, withsocial science and education ranking second andthird, respectively. In the field of education, Nativefemale students outnumbered Native male gu-

y dents by almost three to one. In computer science,Native student enrollment is disproportionatelylow. Less than 0.2 percent of the total degrees forcomputer science were granted to Native students.

Adult EducationThe Adult Education Act, (Public Law 100-297)

was reauthorized in 1988. This Act is intended toimprove educational opportunities by enablingadults to:

1. acquire basic educational skills necessaryfor literate functioning;

2. complete secondrzy school;3. benefit from job training and retraining

programs;4. obtain productive employment; and5. more &fly enjoy the benefits and respon-

sibilities of citizenship.State educational agencies receive adult educa-

tion grants based on the number of adults thathave not completed secondary school. In turn, thestates fund local adult education programs ad-

5

Hillabrant, Romano, Stang & Charleston

ministered by local educational agencies, otherpublic condos and institutions, and private non-profit organizations. Adult education programs ad-mini stored by tribes, Native groups andorganizations are often ineligible to receive AdultEducation Act !kinds granted * state educationagencies because Natives are not included in thestate education plan or Native organisations arenot considered to be a local educational agency.

Figure 5 displays the enrollment of Native stu-dents in adult education programs funded underthe Adult Education Act from 1985-1988 withprojections. In 1991, we estimate that over 38,000Native adults will participate in state-ad-ministered adult education programs, a numberthat is increasing at about 2,000 per year (seeTable 15). However, little confidence should beplaced in the forecast for the year 2000 because ofthe quality of the data. The growth rate in Nativeadult education is about five percent per year, ascompared with a growth of about. one percent peryear for the U.S. population as a whole. [13,14] Interms of absolute numbers, about 2.2 percent of theNative population will participate in suchprograms in 1991, as compared with 1.2 percent ofthe total U.S. population.

Mother source of funding for Native adulteducation is the Adult Education Program of theOffice of Indian Education in the U.S. Departmentof Education. The number of students enrolled inadult education programs funded under this Officehas varied from 1985-1989 (see Figure 5). Overall,participation is showing signs of decrease. Theprogram appears to be losing about 500 studentseach year, and our estimate for 1991 of 6,038participants will be dropping to around 1,500 bythe year 2000 if trends continue (Table 16). Par-ticipation in this program has fluctuated since itsinception in 1985, so the forecast is not particularlytrustworthy. [16]

The BIA provides funds for tribal adult educa-tion programs. As with the Office of Indian Educa-tion, Adult Education Program, participation inthe BIA program is decreasing by nearly 300 ctu-dents a year (see Figure 5). Our estimate of 11,628participants for 1991 will be dropping to around9,000 in the year 2000, ifthe trend continues (Table16). [19]

It appears that while overall Native adulteducation participation is growing, the DIA and EDNative Adult Education programs ars shrinking.

Vocational EducationThe Department of Educadon provides grants

to states for vocational education programs asauthorized by the Carl D. Perkins Vocational

Indians Nations At Risk: Solutions for the 1990s

Education Act. The objectives of this act includethe following.

Improve and modernize vocational educa-tion to meet the needs of the workforce;Promote economic growth; and

Ensure disadvantaged and handicappedstudent' have access to quality vocationaleducation programs.

While trthes and Native organizations May beeligible to obtain grants administered by thestates, most states do not award grants ta them.The U.S. Department of Education Indian Voca-tional Education Program provides discretionarygranta to eligible trthes, tribal organizations, andAluka Native groups. The Act included a provisionthat sets aside 1.25 percent of the appropriatedfunds for Native programs.

Since its inception in 1977, the program hasmaintained data on appropriations, total projects,and applications for grants received. Table 17shows that total appropriations are increasing ata rate of about $500,000 per year, with nearly $12million to be spent in 1991. [20] The total numberof projects funded is also increasing, at fewer thantwo per year. [21] With an estimated 47 projectsto be funded in 1991, the average project value is$250,000. There appears to be only a slight andnon-significant increase in the rate of grant ap-plications about one or two each year. [22]Roughly 64 applications are projected to bereceived in 1991 for an estimated 47 new andcentinuation projects.

The BIA administers an Adult Vocation Educa-tion Program. This program is available to mem-bers of federally recognized tribes, 18 to 35 yearsof age, residing on or near their reservation, trustlqnd or Native village. The program enrolls ap-proximately 3,000 students each year.

Vocational RehabilitationVocational rehabilitation generally involves

retraining for a new job skill or level to help dis-abled persons seek employment in a new field. TheRehabilitation Services Administration (RSA), ofthe U.S. Department of Education, has an IndianVocational Rehabilitation Program. This programprovides funds under the Rehabilitation Act of1973, as amended by Public Law 99-506. In 1990,RSA funded 14 grants to tribal vocationalrehabilitation programs. These grants totalled$3,815,500, and an estimated 4,000 Natives par-ticipated in the vocational rehabilitationprograms.

6

Special ProgramsBetween 1978 and 1986, the numiser of Native

students attending public elementary and secon-dary schools in the United States increased from329,430 to 355,796 students, an increase of eightpercent. Of these students, 36,973 were placed invarious special education programs, and ap-proximately 55 percent of this number were placedin classes for the learning disabled (Office of CivilRights: Elementary and Secondary School CivilRights Survey, 1987).

In MA schools, the number of children receiv-ing special education and related services in-

, creased by 35 percent since 1977, the principalincrease coming from the categories of learningdisabled and speech impaired children (Office forCivil Rights Survey, 1987). Table 18 presents acomparison of the percentage of Native and Whitestudents in special education in 1986. Native stu-dents are significantly underrepresented in giftedand talented programs and overrepresented inprograms for students with learning disabilities.

For all school systems in any region and at anylevel, special education, consistently has thegreatest need for qualified teachers and staff'. Highstaff turnover and low student achievement areunfortunately common in these areas. The Nativepopulation has greater needs for special educationprofessionals than other groups.

Standardized Measures ofScholastic Aptitude

There has been a long and continuing debateabout the utility, validity and fairness of stand-ardized tests such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test(SAT) and the American College Testing Program(ACT). Nevertheless, both the ACT and SAT areextensively used by American colleges at,. part oftheir selection process. We report the travls inNative scores below.

The ACTScores from the ACT examination, which cer ars

English, math, social studies, and natural sciences,were analyzed for this paper.

FigLL re 6 shows the trends in the national scoresby ethnic group during the period 1985-1989. Withthe exception ofWhites, all groups showed improv-ing scores during this period. Whites, who current-ly score the highest, are forecast to be surpassedby Puerto Rican/Other Hispanic by the year 2000(Table 19). Looking at the rates of improvement inthe scores, Native students showed the least im-provement during this time period, except forWhites (ACT, 1989)423, 24, 25, 26, 27]

Demographics

Because ACT scores are available for a series ofyears for different ethnic groups by ACT com-ponent (English, math, social studies, and naturalsciences), it is possible to learn a bit more aboutwhere Native students are loin the best, andwhere they are showing th -4 most improvement.Our analyses, shown in Table 20, may 1r" sum-marized by the following points. [28, 29, 30, 31, 32,33, 34, 35]

Lae all students, Native students receivetheir highest scores in the natural scien-ces, lowest scores in math and socialstudies.Native students are improving in all four.areas. They are showing the greatest im-provenaent in math scores, which are im-proving at a rate of over one quarter-testunit each year. The weakest area is socialstudies, which is improving at a rate oflessthan one-tenth test unit each year. In con-trast, all students are losing ground inmath and social studies, and showinggrowth only in English.Despite the gains being made by Nativestudents in all areas, and the generaldeterioration of the scores of all students,Native students are still far behind. Giventhe current trends, even by the year 2000,Native students will still lag substantiallybehind the current and forecast scores forall students. On the average, the Nativestudents score 15.1 on a test where allstudents score 18.6. Native performance isonly 81 percent that of the performance ofall students.

The SATThe SAT is widely used for selection of students

for nost-secondary programs. Figures 7 and 8 showthe great disparity between Native student testscores and those of the White and total studentpopulations.

Table 21 summarizes the trends of the SATdata. It can be seen that Native students trail thegeneral population substantially in both math andverbal SAT scores. Native student scores are im-proving, however, going up a small amount eachyear in verbal, and a greater amount in math,where they do best. [41, 42, 43, 44]

Native student math aptitude is higher thanverbal aptitude on the SAT; in contrast, mathaptitude is lower than verbal aptitude scores on theACT as discussed previously.

Hillabrant, Romano, Stang & Charleston

7

Attrition and DropoutA series of studies have analyzed the prob-

ability and risk factors of secondary minority stu-dents dropping out of school at certain intervals.The third in a series of longitudinal studies con-ducted by the National Center for EducationalStatistics (NCES), the National Education Lon-gitudinal Study of 1988 (NCES, 1988) commencedwith a large sample of eighth graders. The nationalsample of 1,000 schools, including 800 public and200 private schools, yielded a group of 26,000eighth grade studects.

In subsequent years, a directed attempt will bemade to follow all students classified as dropoutsin the original sample. Beginning in 1990, variousattribute-specific student subpopulations arebeing examined in two year intervals. Table 22dePneates factors identified by the study to corre-late with the probability of a student becoming adropout. Figure 9 shows the dropout rates for someracial-ethnic groups; Native students have thehighest dropout rate, almost twice that of Whitestudents.

For these studies, a student dropout is definedas an individual enrolled in school at some timeduring the previous school year, was not enrolledat the beginning of the current school year, has notgraduated from high school or completed an ap-proved educational program, and is not absentfrom school due to illness, nor transferred toanother public school district, private school, orother approved educational program. The overalldropout rates reported heve (and used as thebaselines for subsequent comparisons) are only theattrition rates between Spring of the sophomoreyear and Spring of the senior year. They should notbe construed as estimates of the total dropout ratefrom the 1980 sophomore cohort.

Educational AttainmentWe determined Native representation among

graduates receiving Associate degrees, Bachelor'sdegrees, and Doctoral degrees. Figure 10 showsthat the number of Master's degrees awarded toNative students has been increasing regularly.The other degree categories generally show a trendfor increase over time, but with an occasionaldecrease in the number of degrees awarded. Weproject that, in the year 2000, 6,400 Associate,6,200 Bachelor's, 1,600 Master's and 100 Doctoraldegrees will be awarded to Native students.

We also examined the degrees awarded to Na-tive students as a proportion of all degreesawarded for each type of degree. We estimate thatin 1991-92, 0.66 percent of all U.S. graduates

Indians Nations At Risk: Solutions for the 1990s

receiving Associates Digress will be Native stu-dents, as compared with 0.41 percent of thosereceiving Bachelor's degrees and .51 percent ofthose receiving Doctoral degrees. We forecast littlechange by the year 2000, but the trend is for adecreasing proportion ofNatives earning Associatedegrees, and an increasing proportion of Nativeearning Bachelor's, and Doctoral degrees.[10,11,12] Mile some sources using the same rawnumbers conclude that participation in wiry de-gree category decreases as higher levels of educa-tional attainment are reached [NAME, p. 231 wesee trend for Native students to earn Bachelor'srather than Associate degrees (Table 23).

Funding For EducationOver the years, there has been a variety of

fimding programs for Native education. Earlier inthis century, the 13IA controlled most reservationschools and was in charge of corresponding finan-cial resources. More recently, there has been atrend for the Department of Education to providegreater support. Overall, Native education fundingappears to have been growing since 1975. Theannual expenditures for BIA education, for ex-ample, show an increase of $2.6 million per year oran increase per year of about one percent. How-ever, rather than applying current dollars over thistime period, it is certainly more accurate to takeinflation into account. When this is done, it be-comes evident that BIA education furtd:ng hasactually fallen by $11.8 million per year from fiscalyear 1975 through fiscal year 1991 (Figure 11).Figure 11 also shows that the same situation hasbeen true of spending on Native education by theother major funding swency, the Department ofEducation (from Survey Report, National Centerfor Education Statistics, Federal Support forEducation: Fiscal Years 1980 to 1989, August1990). It is difficult to imagine how significantimprovements/but be made in Native education ifthe trend of decreasing federal expenditures con-tinues.

Private foundations, such as the Bush Founda-tion in St. Paul, Minnesota, have been helpful infunding certain selective educational institutions.The Bush Foundation has concentrated some of its$400 million portfolio on the development and en-hancement of tribal colleges. For example, begin-ning in April, 1977 the Bush Foundation made itsfirst grant of $100,000 to construct a library at theSinte Gleska College on the Rosebud Indian Reser-vation in South Dakota. Since that time, the Foun-dation has granted over $1.5 million to eight fullyaccredited tribal colleges in the states of Montana,North Dakota, and South Dakota.

8

Since 1983, the majority of the Bush Founda-tion support for triballycoatrolled colleges hasbeen used for faculty development. Most of thesecolleges are geographically isolated, operatingbudgets are limited, and opportunities are scarcefor faculty members to attend professional meetpings, engage in graduate study, or improve cur-ricula. Grants for this purpose have generallyaveraged $25,000 annually for each of the eightcolleges served. During 1989, approximately$260,000 was appropriated for faculty develop-sent activities in these colleges (The Bush Foun-dation Annual Report for 1989, St. Paul,Mineenota).

Currently, there are 24 taally-controlled com-munity colleges with most receiving fundingthrough the 'Itribally Controlled Community Cel-lege Assistance Act of 1978, as amended, and otherfoundation or grant sources. Table 24 shows thatthese sources of funding have been drying up,when examined on a per-pupil basis. Each yearmeans the loss of about $110 per student in &rul-ing. In 1991, the average per-student ftmding isestimated at only $1,771; by the year 2000 this willbe down to $772 per student, if present bondscontinue. [091

Paul Boyer's Tribal Colleges narrates the his-;Try and challenging issues which have confrontedthe development of the tribal college system(Boyer, 1989). The report, sponsored by the Car-negie Foundation, points out that in spite of abudget passed by Congress amounting to over$4,000 per student (Tribally Controlled Com-munity College Act of 1978), only $3,000 per stu-dent had actually been appropriated in 1980.Worse yet, by 1989, after increasing the totalbudget considerably, the amount appropriated perstudent was a mere $1,900.

Under the Indian Education Act, the U.S.Department of Education awards competitive dis-cretionary grants to Native tribes, villages, or-ganizations, and institutions for adult education.These grants have been increasing at a rate ofabout $57 per student per year. In 1991, an es-timated $640 will be spent per student, and iftrends continue, over $1,100 in the year 2000. [17]In contrast to this slight growth is a nearly flat rateof expenditure per pupil in the BIA Adult Educa-tion Program. Here, per-oupil funding is shrinkingat the rate of almost $2 per year (Table 24).(18]

For these three funding sources combined, totalper-pupil funding is dropping at about $56 peryear, an average decrease of two percent of thetotal funding available.

The BIA offers a Higher Education Grant Pro-gram which is another source of funds for Native

!J

Demographics

studenta. Table 25 summarizes trends in the num-ber served (36), average grant size [37], and num-ber of graduates.(38) This program, we estimate,will serve over 18,000 students in 1991, and nearly500 additional students each year. The averagegrant size is quite small relative to the costs ofhigher education: just under $1,500 a yiesir perstudent, and rather than keeping pace with infla-tion, is shrinking each year.

Teachers, Administrative, andSchool Personnel

A critical attribute in creating a quality educa-tional environment is the teacher. Regrettably, thetraining, recruitment, and retention of teachers,especially in minority schools, is a major problem.In reservation schools, and in other rural schoolareas, new teachers from urban areas often find itdifficult to remain in a school located far from a cityand all its resources.

Teacher turnover is especially high in scienceand mathematics and, with the Native students inparticular, there seems to be a variety of obstaclesto effective learning (Lawrenz, 1988). Typically inthese situations, students have insufficient sup-port (such as teaching assistants), and teachersbecome frustrated with inadequate supplies andequipment.

In The Condition of Teaching, a recent surveyof teachers throughout the United States fundedby the Carnegie Foundation, 96 percent ofteacherssurveyed spend some of their own money on sup-plies for the classroom, at an average per teachercost of $250 for the first half of the 1989-1990 schoolyear (Boyer, 1990). If such a lack of support existsthroughout the country for classroom equipment,then it is no surprise that Native schools are ineven more need of such supplies and support.

Kathleen Cotton, in a report from theNorthwest Regional Educational Laboratory, en-titled Reducing Teacher Turnover in ReservationSchools, states, for example, that on the Pine RidgeReservation in South Dakota, up to 41 percent ofnew teachers leave by the end of the school year(Cotton, 1987). Cotton suggests that teachers wholeave tend to have the following attributes: young,inexperienced, single, and from urban areas. Lackof administrative support, low salaries, and inade-quate curriculum development are all significantfactors in this turnover. A selective teacher recruit-ment program, drawbg on Native teachers (andothers with experience in Native culture and tradi-tions), is needed. Although figures are not avail-able for salaries by teacher ethnicity, the averagesalary nationwide for public school thachers was

Hillabrant. Romano. Stang lit Charleston

$25,198 in 1986 and, for private school teachers forthe same year, $14,400.

The general trend has been a slow increase innumbers of Native teachers and faculty, althoughnot nearly approaching a percentage comparableto the Native population. The state of Oklahoma,for example, in order to begin to initiate tangibleimprovements in minority faculty hiring, enactedan incentive grant in 1985 paying up to $25,000 fora first time employed faculty member in a full-timeteaching position, from a minority racial or ethnic

. flrouP.Approximately 471,000 people were employed

u full-time faculty at college and university levelsin 1983, Whites accounting for 425,691 (over 90percent) of faculty positions, with Native full-timefaculty increasing from 1,050 to 1,310 from 1975 to1983, including about 27 percent Native women(Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,1983).

A Final NoteWe believe that good data and analyses are

essential if we are1. to improve the effectiveness and efficiency

of the educational process within schools atall levels for the Native student,

2. to promote and maintain Native culturaland historical identity within educationalsystems,

3. to counsel Native students using currentinformation

4. to keep government agencies and Congressaware of the financial and other needs forNative education.

It would be nice to think that by the year 2000,the Native student will attain a level equal to thegenera; gtudent population in terms of academicand social achievements. Our analyses suggestthis is improbable without massive, and effectiverestructuring of Native education from pre-schoolto professional schools.

ReferencesAmerican College Testing Program 1989 Yearly

Report.Boyer, Paul. (1989). Tribal Colleges. Carnegie

Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Princeton, New Jersey. Princeton UniversityPress.

Bureau of Indian Affairs. (1988). Report on BIAEducation: Excellence in Indian EducationThrough the Effective Schools Process: Final

Indians Nations At Risk: Solutions for the 1990s

Review Draft. U.S. Department of the Interior.Washington, D.C. Government Printing Office.

Bush Foundation Annual Report for 1989, St, Paul,Minnesota

Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement ofTeaching. (1990). The Condition of Teaching.Princeton, New Jersey. Princeton UniversityPreu.

Cotton, Kathleen. (1987). Reducing Teacher III"-over in Reservation Schools. NorthwestRegional Education Laboratory. Portland,Oregon.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,Higher Education Staff Information Survey,1983.

Fries, Judith E. (1987). The American Indian inHigher Education: 1975-76 to 1984-85. Centerfor Education Statistics. Washington, D.C.Government Printing Office.

Gejar, A. (1988). American Indian personnelpreparation in special education: Needs, pro-gram components, programs. Journal ofAmerican Indian Education, 24(2), 7-15.

Hodgkinson, Harold L. (1990). The Demographicsof American Indians. Center for DemographicPolicy.

Johnson, D.L., Edna L. Paisano, and Michael J.Levin. We, the First Americans. Bureau of' theCensus, U.S. Department of Commerce,December 1988.

Lawrenz, Frances. (1988, December). NativeAmerican School Environments. School Scienceand Mathematics, 88(8), 676-682.

Minority Post-secondary Enrollment Data. (1990,April 11). Chronicle of Higher Education.

Morgan, J. & O'Connell J.C. (1987). The rehabilita-tion of disabled Native Americans. Internation-al Journal of Rehabilitative Research, 10(2),139-149.

National Center for Education Statistics. (1989).Digest of Education Statistics. U.S. Depart-ment of Education, Washington, D.C. Govern-ment Printing Office.

National Center for Education Statistics. (1990,August). Federal Support for Education: FiscalYears 1980 to 1989. U.SRepartment of Educa-tion. Washington, D.C. Government PrintingOffice.

National Center for Education Statistics. (1988).National Education Longitudinal Study of1988: Baee Year Student Survey. U.S. Depart-ment of Education. Washington, D.C. Govern-ment Printing Office.

National Center for Education Statistics, Projec-tions of Education Statistics to the Year 2000,1989.

National Center for Education Statistics. (1990).Trends in Racial / Ethnic Enrollment in HigherEducation: Fall 1978 through Fall 1998. U.S.Department of Education. Washington, D.C.Government Printing Office.

Office of Civil Rights. (1986). National StateMinority Enrollment Date: Elementary and&condary School Civil Rights Survey. U.S.Department of Education. Washington, D.C.Government Printing Office.

Office of Educational Research and Improvement..; (1988). High School and Bryond: A Descriptive

Summary of 1980 High School Seniors: Sixrears Later. U.S. Department of Education.Washington, D.C. Government Printing Office.

Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education.(1990).A Background Report: The Distributionof Native Americans in the Oklahoma StateSystem of Higher Education by Inatitution andby Tribe. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

Ramirez, Bruce A. & Johnson, Marilyn J. (1988).American Indian Exceptional Children: Im-proved Practices and Policy. Ethnic and Multi-cultural Symposium.

U.S. Census Bureau. (1990, Febniary). Charac-teristks of American Indians by Tribe aridSelected Areas. U.S. Department of Commerce.Washington, D.C. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Census Bureau. (1980). General PopulationCharacteristics: United States Summary. U.S.Department of Commerce. Washingtea, D.C.Government Printing Office.

U.S. Census Bureau. (1970). General PopulationCharacteristics: United States Summary. U.S.Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C.Government Printing Office.

U.S. Census Bureau. (1960). General PopulationCharacteristics: United States Summary. U.S.Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C.Government Printing Office.

U.S. Census Bureau. (1950). General PopulationCharacteristics: United States Summary. U.S.Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C.Government Printing Office.

U.S. Census Bureau. (1940). General PopulationCharacteristics: United States Summary. U.S.Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C.Government Printing Office.

U.S. Census Buralu. (1988). Statistical Profilesand Characteristics of the American IndianPopulation: 1980 Census. U.S. Department ofCommerce. Washington, D.C. GovernmentPrinting Office.

Demographics

About the AuthorsWalter Hillabrant, Ph.D. is a member of' the

Citizen Band Potawatomi Tribe. He is apsychologist working at Support Services, Inc.(SSD, a consulting firm specializing in the arm ofhealth, education, and information sFstemsmanagement. Walter has served as an expert wit-ness in statistics end data analysis in numerouscases involving the civil rights of minority stu-dents, and as the technical advisor to Resource and

Hillabrant, Romano, Stang & Charleston

Evaluation Center One serving Indian EducationAct Grantees east of the Mississippi River.

Mike Romano is a writer and researcherwhose interests range from demography, health,education and science. Mike writes educationalsoftware, and currently is active in environmentalstudies and law.

David Stang, Ph.D. is a psychologist andprolific writer, having authored eight books, 35papers, and over 160 articles on computer-relatedtopics. David is currently most active in the areaof computer security.

11 1 2

=NCU.S. Dept. of Education

Office of EducationalResearch and Improvement (0ERI)

raumnir

Date FilmedAugust 8, 1992