This paper examines the career developmental needs of Native Americans, with particular attention to those residing on reservations and in urban areas of the Southwestern United States. Drawing on a qualitative review of historical and contemporary literature, the paper traces legislative efforts, vocational training programs, and educational initiatives from the 1970s through the 2000s. It highlights persistent barriers—including high dropout rates, disability, substance abuse, geographic isolation, and cultural conflict with mainstream employment values—while also documenting promising collaborative models designed to support Native American youth in transitioning to postsecondary education and careers. The paper concludes that culturally grounded, tribally led programs have proven most effective in advancing educational and economic outcomes for Native youth.
The paper demonstrates historical-qualitative synthesis: rather than collecting new empirical data, it constructs an argument by sequencing and interpreting published studies and government reports across multiple decades. This technique allows the writer to identify long-term patterns (such as the recurring gap between congressional intent and reservation-level outcomes) that single-period studies would miss.
The paper opens with a problem statement and legislative background, transitions into a methodology section that explains the qualitative, literature-based approach, and then moves through three chronological literature review sections (1970s, 1980s/1990s, and 2000s). Each section introduces new sources and builds on the previous period's findings. A brief concluding section synthesizes the overall trajectory. The structure mirrors a standard research paper format while adapting it to a historical review purpose.
The objective of this paper is to examine the career developmental needs of Native Americans, primarily those residing in urban areas and on reservations — specifically those in the Southwestern portion of the United States.
Historically, as noted in the work of Delcruz (1978), social reality and historical relationships are much slower to change than "congressional wisdom." In other words, that which is legislated is often slow in application and implementation, and slow to change the methods that have been used throughout history in dealing with relationships and the everyday real-life experiences of certain minorities — in this study, specifically those of Native American Indians.
The work of Joseph B. Delcruz entitled "Educational Programs for Native Americans: Implications for Vocational Education Research and Development" states that legislation was enacted in the early 1960s by Congress and the Kennedy-Johnson Administration that was "more responsive to Native Americans" (Delcruz, 1978). Delcruz relates that these legislative changes advanced to the passage of the Indian Self-Determination and Educational Assistance Act of 1975 (P.L. 93-638), which states in part that "the Congress hereby recognizes the obligation of the Indian People for self-determination" and that "the Indian people will never surrender their desire to control their relationships both among themselves and non-Indian governments, organizations, and persons" (Delcruz, 1978).
Delcruz writes that the problem was that the treaties "contained provisions for vocational training, but the training was superimposed with assumptions by non-Indians as to the type of training and the process of instruction" (Delcruz, 1978). He states that congressional legislation focused on reservation-based development, and that the Indian Self-Determination Act "provides contracting authority for Indian Tribes to assume programs previously administered by the BIA or Indian Health Service" (Delcruz, 1978).
According to Delcruz's historical review (1978), various training programs — specifically the BIA's Indian Action Teams, started in 1972, and the Department of Labor's CETA programs — made provisions for employment on reservations to support tribal development. Delcruz states specifically that the U.S. Office of Education's setting aside of a mere "one percent" for Indians is a "blatant indication that historical relationships change slower than congressional wisdom or social realities" (Delcruz, 1978).
The methodology of this study is qualitative in nature and is conducted through an extensive review of the available literature in this specific area of study. It takes the form of a historical review of the literature, drawing on the most relevant and recent information available. While much of this review concerns the law, it is also ethnographic in nature, as it shares the personal stories and experiences of being a Native American Indian within the legal climate of the United States — both in principle and in application.
At the time Delcruz wrote his report in 1978, he noted that vocational training had not been gearing Native American communities toward:
"…utilization of our land and natural resources, and has not equipped us to do anything to assume jobs that were related to development of the land and natural resources… If we control our natural resources, then we should develop those natural resources. We can only develop those natural resources if we have the technical skills and manpower to do so… Our people never had the opportunity to participate to any effective degree in the development of their human resources so that they can do these things with their natural resources. People do not realize that we control vast amounts of natural resources and the only reason that we aren't developing them and utilizing them to our benefit is because we don't have the human resources, the trained, experienced people that do it…" (Delcruz, 1978)
These words were reported by Delcruz to have been stated in June 1977 by Warren Means, a Native American and former member of the National Advisory Council on Vocational Education.
It is reported in the work entitled "Transition and Native American Youth: A Follow-up Study of School Leavers on the Fort Apache Indian Reservation" (Shafer and Rangasamy, 1995) that in 1988 the dropout rate was 35.5% among American Indians, compared to 28.8% for the U.S. population. In the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988, 19% of American Indians in the 8th grade indicated that they expected to drop out of high school, or that high school graduation would be the terminal point of their education (Shafer and Rangasamy, 1995).
Additionally, only a very small percentage of American Indian parents expected their children to attend college (National Center for Education Statistics, 1988, cited in Shafer and Rangasamy, 1995). A study conducted by the Bureau of Indian Affairs in the 1980s identified 6,816 school-aged students between the ages of 5 and 21 as disabled (O'Connell, 1987, cited in Shafer and Rangasamy, 1995). The most prevalent disabling conditions included learning disabilities, speech impairment, and mental retardation. Other less visible types of disabilities found in Native American youth were those associated with psychosocial problems (Shafer and Rangasamy, 1995).
At that time the suicide rate among Native American Indian youth was in some places three to ten times the rate for the general population (O'Connell, 1987, cited in Shafer and Rangasamy, 1995). Adding to the already difficult situation was substance and alcohol abuse, which occurred at two to three times the rate of their peers. All of these factors resulted in Native American Indian youth being "at greater risk for educational failure and, ultimately, economic disability" (Shafer and Rangasamy, 1995).
During the 1990s, the U.S. Congress undertook a number of legislative initiatives designed specifically to enhance employment opportunities for persons with disabilities. First, the 1986 re-authorization of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act (P.L. 99-506) provided specific mandates for supported employment and rehabilitation engineering services. Second, the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (P.L. 101-336) in 1990 provided specific safeguards and accommodations for persons with disabilities seeking entry to the workforce. Third, and perhaps most essential, the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1990 provided specific mandates for transition planning and rehabilitation counseling services for students with disabilities (Shafer and Rangasamy, 1995).
You’re 38% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.