Overwhelmingly, those programs are explicitly designed to be culturally responsive, but, again, not just to tribal groups. One program, for example, is likely to have tribal students, Hispanic students, and other immigrant groups. A massive data-collection effort is underway to measure successful programmatic elements and determine which efforts have produced the most dramatic results.
One of the principles guiding the current push in California to provide more and better after-school programs is as follows: "Programs should foster a positive sense of identity, build upon the cultures of the families, and offer a curriculum that values and responds to the strengths, challenges, and needs of all of the different kinds of youth in their communities," (Olsen, 2000). While this goal doesn't specifically identify Native American tribal needs, it does hit upon the most important element of culturally responsive programming. For many Native families, placing their children in an after-school program through the local public school represents further separation for that child from traditional cultural norms. If the goal as described here can, in fact, be achieved, Native families may become more willing to send their children to those programs. If the state of California adopts this approach, it will also attract more funding and make those programs more available to needy Native groups in the state.
Conclusion
Native Americans have a distinct, fascinating, and influential culture. Unlike other minority groups, if their culture founders in America, it will die altogether. Assimilation is thus greeted with skepticism by many tribal leaders, who choose instead to live in close-knit communities on reservations. The children in these communities do not always fare well, however. Abuse, neglect, and a dearth of educational and vocational opportunities are too often the landscape they face. Culturally-responsive after school programs have shown remarkable results for ethnic minorities across the...
This is the best model for reaching the Native American population, as it creates growth opportunities for children without forcing them to choose between the culture of their families and that of their school.
Works Cited
Birmingham, Jennifer, et.al. 2005. Shared Features of High-Performing After-School
Programs: A Follow UP to the TASC Evaluation. Policy Studies Associates: Washington, D.C.
California After School Network: A Road Map to the California After School Landscape.
2010. Available at: www.afterschoolnetwork.org
Four Directions Institute. California Indians. Available at:
http://www.fourdir.com/california_indians_index.htm
Kang, Andrew and Julie Weber. 2010. Opportunities for Policy Leadership on Afterschool Care. The Sloan Foundation Work and Family Research Network,
Policy Briefing Series, #5: Boston, MA.
Little, P., Wimer, C., and Weiss, H. 2008. After School Programs in the 21st Century:
Their Potential and What it Takes to Achieve it. Harvard Family Research
Project: Cambridge, MA.
Native American Research: California Indians Portal. Available at:
http://www.kumeyaay.info/california_native_research.html
Olsen, Laurie. 2000. Reflections on Access and Equity Implications for After School
Program Evaluations. The Evaluation Exchange, 6 (1): Harvard Family Research
Project: Cambridge, MA.
Reyhner, Jon. Et.al. 1993. A Specialized Knowledge Base for Teaching American Indian
and Alaska Native Students. Tribal College Journal 4 (4): 26-32.
State Profile: California. 2008. Afterschool Investments. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Washington, DC.
Wright, Gretchen. 2008. Sioux Falls Afterschool Program Receives Afterschool
Innovator Award. Press Release: May 14, 2008. Available at: www.afterschoolalliance.org
