Two Policy Approaches to Native Education: Can Reform Be Legislated?.
The evolution of Canadian federal policy for Native elementary and secondary education has followed a pattern remarkably similar to that in the United States. A significant difference in the provision of educational services to indigenous peoples is, however, that whereas the United States has historically attempted to regulate and reform Native education through federal legislation, Canada has generally eschewed such a proactive strategy in favour of what Hall (1992) refers to as the “No Policy-Policy.” In this article I examine the evolution of Native education policy in both countries to determine which approach has brought Native people closer to their desired goal of having control over their children’s education. La politique federale canadienne d’enseignement primaire et secondaire destinee aux autochtones suit une evolution semblable a celle des Etats-Unis. ll existe toutefois une difference significative dans la prestation des services educatifs aux peuples autochtones: les Etats-Unis ont toujours tente de reglementer et de reformer l’education des autoch- tones par le biais de lois federales tandis que le Canada evite, en regle generale, ce genre de strategie proactive et prefere ce que Hall (1992) designe comme une “politique de non-politique.” Dans cet article, l’auteur analyse l’evolution, dans les deux pays, de la politique en matiere d’enseignement aux autochtones afin de determiner quelle approche permet aux peuples autochtones de se rapprocher de leur objectif, qui est de controler l’education de leurs enfants.
Financing Self-Determination: Federal Indian Expenditures, 1975-1988.
The self-determination of American Indian communities has been federal Indian policy since 1975, when Congress enacted the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, Public Law 93-638. In sections two and three of the act, Congress stated its finding that federal domination of Indian affairs had deprived American Indians of leadership skills and had denied Indians an effective voice in planning and implementing programs. “True self-determination,’’ the Congress concluded, would depend upon an “educational process” which the act was intended to initiate. In initiating a new policy in Indian affairs, Congress stated its commitment to maintain the unique relationship which the United States has with Indian people, often expressed as the trust relationship.’ Title I of the act, which was denoted the Indian Self-Determination Act, directed the Secretaries of the Interior and of Health, Education, and Welfare (now Health and Human Services) to contract with Indian tribes, at the tribes’ request, to plan, conduct, and administer programs provided to tribal members under the authority of the Snyder Act of 1921, the Wheeler-Howard Act of 1934, and the Transfer Act of 1954.2 In addition, Title I authorized grants for strengthening tribal government, for training personnel, and for planning.
The quest for self-determination
Dov Ronen proposes in this interpretive essay that ethnic nationalism is simply the newest form of a basic human drive for self-determination that has been manifested in four other movements since the French Revolution: nineteenth-century nationalism, Marxist-Leninist class self-determination, self-determination for minorities as espoused by Wilson, and decolonization. Ronen's intention in this book is to explain what self-determination is, why people fight for it, and what the implications of the struggle may be. Though Ronen's approach is primarily analytical and philosophical, he uses four cases (the Scots, Biafra, the Palestinians, and South Africa) to illustrate the application of his thesis to current events.