Tribal Colleges

Tribal colleges and universities (TCUs), or tribally controlled colleges, were founded to advance the higher education of American Indians, or Native Americans. Unlike past institutions developed to educate American Indians, TCUs do not strive toward assimilation but rather seek to preserve and support tribal culture and traditions (AIHEC, 1999; Fann, 2002). The American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC) was established to promote the development of new TCUs and support the work of established TCUs. Originally created as two-year institutions, TCUs are believed to represent an important phase of the community college phenomenon as well (Brubacher & Rudy, 1997).

Keywords American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC); American Indians; Articulation Agreements; Assimilation; Community College; First-Generation Students; Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP); Mainstream; Minority; Native American Education; Normal School; Non-Beneficiary Students; Tribal Colleges & Universities (TCU's); Tribally Controlled Colleges (TCC's)

Higher Education > Tribal Colleges

Overview

Why Tribal Colleges & Universities are Important

According to the Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP), an economic and social gap formed between American Indians and mainstream society soon after the first white settlers arrived in North America (IHEP, 2007). IHEP (2007) asserts that "access to quality education in general, and higher education in particular, is key to closing the economic and social gap" (p. 1). Yet, in general, the educational attainment of American Indians runs behind that of the general U.S. population. For instance, 42 percent of American Indians were enrolled in some form of higher education in 2004, as compared to 53 percent of students nationally (IHEP, 2007).

IHEP (2007) also stresses that it is essential that higher education opportunities be relevant to the American Indian cultural context. As such, TCUs serve an important purpose because mainstream higher education institutions tend to overlook the traditions, pedagogical approaches, and measures of success of American Indians (IHEP, 2007). Likewise, Tippeconnic (1999) argued that because of the history of assimilation linked to the education of American Indians in the United States, TCUs are necessary in order to "reclaim and strengthen the use of Native languages and cultures in schools and communities,” and thus “ensuring a strong future for all Indian people" (p. 34). IHEP (2007) offered that American Indian higher education is linked to "dramatic benefits to both individual American Indians and the nation as a whole, including higher rates of employment, less reliance on public assistance, increased levels of health, and a greater sense of civic responsibility" (p. 3).

In 2012 the World Indigenous Nations Higher Education Consortium founded the World Indigenous Nations University (WINU), granting four doctoral degrees the same year. WINU is “the first indigenous international degree granting global institution that holds in its charter the articles of the UN [United Nations] Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (World Indigenous Nations Higher Education Consortium, 2013).

History of American Indian Higher Education & TCUs

McClellan, Tippeconnic Fox, and Lowe (2005) summarized the three historical periods of Native American higher education, which include the colonial, the federal, and the self-determination periods. Little was done to advance the higher education of Native people during the colonial period. Only four Native students had graduated from colonial colleges up to the time of the Revolutionary War (McClellan et al., 2005). Aside from the failings of the colonial colleges to whole-heartedly pursue the education of Native students, it is also thought that Native Americans may have viewed the type of education the colleges offered as holding little value to them (McClellan et al., 2005).

During the federal period, which began after the American Revolution when Native tribes and the federal government entered into treaty relationships, little was again provided in the way of higher education for Native Americans (McClellan et al., 2005). While missionary and federally operated schools were supported with tribal monies acquired through land sale treaties, what higher education was offered focused mainly on technical education, and the general goals of the time were to Christianize, acculturate, and assimilate Native people (Beck, 1995; McClellan et al., 2005). Beck (1995) indicated,

The day schools and boarding schools run by federal government and church missions beginning in the treaty period and extending well into the twentieth century did little to encourage Indians to pursue higher education, although their purposes were largely to force assimilation and to destroy Indian children's connections to their own cultures (p. 19).

Although not a true college, the Carlisle Indian School, which was founded in 1879, has an important place in history as the first industrial school for American Indians (Brubacher & Rudy, 1997). As noted, the type of training at such schools emphasized assimilation of American Indian youth into white civilization (Brubacher & Rudy, 1997). The history of the Carlisle Indian School is told through its football team, which played Ivy League colleges like Harvard, in a text published in 2007 by Sally Jenkins (The Real All Americans: The Team That Changed a Game, a People, a Nation.

Scholars have debated when the final period, the self-determination period, began (McClellan et al., 2005). However, it was during the 1960s that the federal government finally began to pursue policies of self-determination for Native Americans (Beck, 1995; McClellan et al., 2005). The American Indian self-determination movement was fueled by political and social policies leading up to the time (Pavel et al., 1998). Before the self-determination movement of the 1960s, American Indian higher education was characterized by "compulsory Western methods of learning, recurring attempts to eradicate tribal culture, and high dropout rates by American Indian students at mainstream institutions" (AIHEC, 1999, p. A-2). TCUs were conceived to "support efforts for Indian self-determination and strengthen tribal culture without assimilation" (Fann, 2002, p. 2). Until the 1960s, Bacone College (originally founded as Indian University in 1880) was the only primarily Indian college in the United States (Beck, 1995). It was a private school run by Baptists (Beck, 1995). However, a state normal school to train Indians to teach was also founded in 1887 and became Pembroke State College (Beck, 1995). In 1954 it opened its doors to non-Indians after segregation in public schools became illegal (Beck, 1995). Aside from the few other colleges and universities Indian students attended, these two schools for Indians were largely the providers of higher education for American Indians into the twentieth century (Beck, 1995). At the same time, a congressional committee studying the state of Indian education in the late 1960s found the quality of the education American Indians received to be sorely lacking (Beck, 1995). For instance, among those Indian students who were eventually able to attend college, about 97 percent dropped out at that time (Beck, 1995).

The first TCU was Navajo Community College, which was founded in Arizona in 1968 by the Dine organization (O'Laughlin, 2002). It is now known as Diné College (AIHEC, 1999). Once Navajo Community College was formed, other tribes were inspired to found and charter their own colleges (Pavel et al., 1998). Beck (1995) noted that the founding of the tribal community college system "has had broad-reaching effect in Indian country and has gained federal financial as well as tribal support" (p. 23). TCUs and other tribally controlled schools are actually rooted in the schools established by the Cherokee and Choctaw tribes in the nineteenth century, which taught both in English and the tribes' native languages (Tippeconnic, 1999). These schools were successful but were closed by the federal government, which favored a policy of assimilation (Tippeconnic, 1999). It was not until 1975 that Congress actually passed the Indian Self-Determination Act and the Education Assistance Act (Pavel et al., 1998).

McClellan et al. (2005) asserted that the tribal college movement was "the single most significant development in the era of self-determination in Native American higher education" (p. 11). Regarding self-determination, Tippeconnic (1999) explained that because they do not fall under state jurisdiction due to their status as sovereign bodies, tribal governments have the right to make decisions about how to educate their tribal members. Begun primarily as two-year institutions, the development of tribal institutions was "an important phase of the community college phenomenon" (Brubacher & Rudy, 1997, p. 420). By the 1990s the institutions were offering instruction in fields like nursing, social work, business administration, and education, and had awarded more than three thousand associate in arts degrees each year (Brubacher & Rudy, 1997).

Further Insights

Stein (1999) has described TCUs as "small tenacious institutions of higher education that serve the smallest and poorest minority group in the United States (American Indians) under difficult and challenging circumstances" (p. 259). According to O'Laughlin (2002), TCUs were formed to help improve the quality of life for American Indians living on reservations. For example, many American Indians living on reservations live below poverty level (O'Laughlin, 2002). Students enrolling at TCUs on average have household incomes that are 27 percent below poverty level (IHEP, 2007). American Indians also face high unemployment rates especially in comparison to the general U.S. population (AIHEC, 1999; IHEP, 2007). Overall, TCUs "generally serve geographically isolated populations that have no other means of accessing education beyond the high school level" (AIHEC, 1999, p. A-1). The educational program Breaking Through, for example, advocates for Native students not prepared for basic college education (González, 2012).

Basic Characteristics of TCUs

According to O'Laughlin (2002), there are four types of TCUs:

• Tribally controlled community colleges are located on an Indian reservation and are created and chartered by a federally recognized Indian tribe.

• Tribally controlled vocational technical institutions are created and chartered by one or more federally recognized Indian tribes and are funded under the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Act.

• Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) colleges are owned and operated by the BIA, which provides the schools with special funding.

• Congressionally chartered colleges are governed by a board of trustees that are appointed by the U.S. president.

Regardless of with which type they are associated, TCUs, according to the AIHEC (1999), all share the following basic characteristics:

• They started as two-year institutions.

• They have small enrollments, which are mainly American Indian.

• They have open admissions policies.

• They are mainly located on remote reservations.

• They were generally chartered by one or more tribes (this is not the case with congressionally chartered colleges, however).

Each TCU is also associated with a different tribe and helps to preserve the different cultural traditions and language of its affiliated tribe (O'Laughlin, 2002). If an institution is under tribal control it means that the actual tribal government is in control of the school (Tippeconnic, 1999). Tribal control is not simply "Indian control" of education (Tippeconnic, 1999). Some TCUs are now also land-grant colleges, and their focus is determined by the part of the country in which they are located (for example, in the Pacific Northwest the focus is on the fishing industry) (O'Laughlin, 2002). Because of the different tribal and regional influences, the curriculum tends to vary from one TCU to the next (O'Laughlin, 2002). However, all TCUs have articulation agreements with four-year institutions (O'Laughlin, 2002).

TCUs mainly support associate degree or vocational education. In 2005, the 32 TCUs that reported statistics indicated that they offered only 24 bachelor’s degree programs but 414 associate degree programs and 183 vocational programs (AIHEC, 2005). Overall, all TCUs offer some associate degree programs while only seven offer bachelor's degree programs and only two offer master's degree programs (AIHEC, 2005).

The boards of trustees that control tribal colleges are mainly made up of American Indian community members (Stein, 1999). The boards "act as buffers between tribal politics and the colleges … [as well as] mediators among policy makers, personnel selection committees, and local watchdogs of and for the tribal colleges" (Stein, 1999, p. 264). While most administrators at TCUs are also American Indian, most faculty members are not. However, both administrators and faculty members at TCUs alike have been recognized for their dedication to the students they serve (Stein, 1999).

Mission of TCUs

TCUs have a dual mission that entails supporting traditional tribal cultures through "uniquely designed curricula and institutional settings" while also addressing mainstream learning models through curricula that are transferable to four-year institutions (AIHEC, 1999). According to Cunningham and Redmond (2001), "serving and strengthening local communities is [also] a fundamental part of the mission of American Indian Tribal Colleges and Universities" (p. 6). TCUs are involved in the communities in which they are located to a greater extent than other colleges and universities might be. This is because their communities rely on them to help devise solutions to issues and concerns that may be longstanding and critical (Cunningham & Redmond, 2001). Moreover, TCUs are located either in the reservation communities they serve or in proximity to them, allowing members of the community to have easier access to their services (Cunningham & Redmond, 2001).

One specific service that TCUs provide to their communities is working with elementary and secondary school students to help them progress through their education (Cunningham & Redmond, 2001). TCUs also reach out to their communities to help combat the negative effects of health problems like poor nutrition and substance abuse (Cunningham & Redmond, 2001). According to AIHEC (2005), "TCUs serve their community beyond providing higher education" (p. 3). At the same time, Gagnon (2001) noted that some TCUs have had a hard time balancing the demands of community development and have not put academics first. Gagnon (2001) asserted that the primary purpose of the colleges, which is to provide a sound education, has suffered when some TCUs have diverted the majority of their monetary and staff resources from academic causes to work on nonacademic, noncollege issues.

TCU Students

Institutions can be classified as a TCU if at least 51 percent of their enrolled students are American Indian (O'Laughlin, 2002). The majority of students who attend TCUs identify themselves as American Indian females. In the fall of 2005, 80 percent of students enrolled in TCUs were American Indian and 66 percent were female (AIHEC, 2005).

Because the students who attend TCUs often must balance family, work, and school, "an ongoing challenge at TCUs is retention" (AIHEC, 2005, p. 3). Hu (2013) discusses recruitment and retention issues facing tribal colleges and universities in the context of student motivation and desire to be educated.

The typical student who attends a TCU is a single mother in her early thirties (AIHEC, 1999). She may also likely attend part-time, as half of all TCU students do so (AIHEC, 1999). TCU students are also often first-generation students, or the first in their families to attend college (McClellan et al., 2005). Moreover, most TCUs are commuter institutions, as only relatively few provide housing and room and board for their students (O'Laughlin, 2002). The lack of housing and living assistance at most TCUs can be difficult for students who reside several miles from the nearest college (O'Laughlin, 2002). While retention is an issue for TCUs, students at TCUs do at least benefit from the personalized attention that is provided to them (AIHEC, 1999).

Enrollments at TCUs tend to be small and are generally between 200 and 1,000 students (O'Laughlin, 2002). In 2005, reporting TCUs indicated actual enrollments ranging from 60 students to 1,822 students (AIHEC, 2005).

Funding of TCUs

Stein (1999) explained that "tribal colleges interact with the federal government much as state-supported institutions do with state governments" (p. 263). TCUs are not eligible for state or local funds because of the sovereign status of tribes and thus must rely on the bulk of their funding to come from federal appropriations and grants (O'Laughlin, 2002). Approximately eighty percent of the funding at TCUs comes from federal sources (O'Laughlin, 2002). Aside from the federal government, philanthropic and corporate organizations also provide funding to TCUs (Fann, 2002).

Most of the federal funds for operating expenses that TCUs receive are distributed through the Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance Act of 1978 (TCCUAA) administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (AIHEC, 1999). This act is also referred to by others as the Tribally Controlled Community College Assistance Act (TCCC) of 1978 and originally as the Tribal College Act (Stein, 1999). Funding is allocated through the act by way of a formula that is based on the number of Indian students enrolled at a TCU (IHEP, 2007). Pember (2006) explained that while TCUs are required to admit students of all races, federal funding formulas only provide funding to TCUs on a per student basis for those Native students they educate. As such, TCUs must rely upon tuition to cover the costs of non-Native, or nonbeneficiary students who attend the institutions. Yet, Pember (2006) explained that "tuition often just barely covers the costs of educating the non-beneficiary students, placing a tremendous burden on the already cash-strapped colleges" (p. 4).

In general, the total funding provided or appropriated through the act has fallen short of authorized levels, and more resources are needed (IHEP, 2007). Stein (1999) lamented that the federal government has historically underfunded the TCUs and has never appropriated funds to the institutions up to the level authorized by the act. Moreover, the funding levels authorized by the act have failed to keep up with inflation (Stein, 1999).

The American Indian Higher Education Consortium

The American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC) was founded in 1972 by the presidents of the first six TCUs with a mission of supporting the work of all TCUs (AIHEC, 1999). The newly created AIHEC helped to establish new TCUs while securing funds for the tribal college movement (Pavel et al., 1998). For example, in 1978, Congress passed the Tribally Controlled Community College Act. This legislation provided funding for both the establishment of new TCUs and the improvement of existing TCUs (Pavel et al., 1998). AIHEC was involved in the passage of the act and worked with Congress and U.S. president Jimmy Carter to develop it (Pavel et al., 1998).

According to McClellan et al. (2005), various pieces of legislation, including the 1978 act, have worked to help expand the number of TCUs in the United State since the 1960s. These include the Navajo Community College Act of 1971, the Indian Education Act of 1972, the Indian Self-Determination Act of 1975, the Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance Act of 1978, and the extension of land-grant status by way of the Morrill Act to tribal colleges in 1994. Land-grant status was granted to TCUs by Congress in 1994 (Pavel et al., 1998). According to Fann (2002), TCUs status as land-grant institutions enables them to have access to resources that will support additional faculty and equipment to conduct agricultural research (independently or in collaboration with four-year institutions).

By 2014, thirty-seven TCUs in the United States (and one in Canada) made up the AIHEC.

Current Issues

In general, most Native Americans who attend college are enrolled at two-year rather than four-year institutions (AIHEC, 1999). TCUs have taken on a goal of expanding to four-year colleges (Stein, 1999).

The students who attend TCUs are also changing. TCUs have always offered help to their tribal communities to deal with many economic, social, educational, and health-related problems. However, the American Indian population has also become younger, and TCUs will become even more essential to the well-being of future generations of these students (AIHEC, 1999).

Terms & Concepts

Articulation Agreements: Course credit transfer policies between institutions, such as two- and four-year institutions.

Assimilation: The process by which a culturally distinct group is made to resemble and take on the traits of another distinct cultural group (Barnhart & Stein, 1962).

First-Generation Students: Those students who are the first in their families to attend college or university.

Mainstream: The principal or prevailing form of some system, group, or the like.

Normal School: A school developed primarily to train teachers.

Non-Beneficiary Students: Those non-Native students who attend TCUs, which generally do not receive any state or federal funding to educate such students.

Self-Determination: With regard to American Indian higher education, refers to the efforts of tribes to determine and implement the best course of action for their people's education.

Sovereign: Possessing supreme and independent control or authority (Barnhart & Stein, 1962).

Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCU): Also known as tribally controlled colleges (TCC), these are higher education institutions that seek to preserve and honor tribal traditions and cultures while also providing mainstream higher education; TCUs are generally chartered by one or more American Indian tribes and are controlled by mainly American Indian boards of trustees.

Tribal Control: Means that the actual tribal government is in control of the school (Tippeconnic, 1999).

Bibliography

American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC). (1999). Tribal colleges: An introduction. Retrieved July 9, 2007, from http://www.aihec.org/documents/Research/intro.pdf

American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC). (2005). AIHEC AIMS fact book 2005 highlights. Retrieved July 9, 2007, from http://www.aihec.org/documents/PDFS/AIMS/AIHEC_AIMS_2005FactBook_Highlights.pdf

Barnhart, C. L., & Stein, J. (eds.). (1962). The American college dictionary. New York: Random House.

Beck, D. (1995). American Indian higher education before 1974: From colonization to self-determination. In J. Brown (ed.), Critical issues in Indian higher education (pp. 16-24). Chicago: American Indian Press. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED388478).

Brubacher, J. S., & Rudy, W. (1997). Higher education in transition (4th ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

Cunningham, A., & Redmond, C. (2001). Building strong communities: Tribal colleges as engaged institutions. Lincoln, NE: American Indian Higher Education Consortium. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED451818).

Fann, A. (2002). Tribal colleges: An overview (ERIC digest). Los Angeles: ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED467847).

Gagnon, G. (2001). Keeping the tribal colleges tribal. Tribal College Journal, 12 , 37. Retrieved July 12, 2007, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=4186164&site=ehost-live

González, J. (2012). Tribal colleges offer basic education to students “not prepared for college.” Chronicle of Higher Education, 58, A25-26. Retrieved December 19, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=74564696&site=ehost-live

Hu, H. (2013). Challenge accepted. Diverse: Issues in Higher Education, 30, 12-13. Retrieved December 19, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=92572068&site=ehost-live

Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP). (2007). The path of many journeys: The benefits of higher education for Native people and communities. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy.

McClellan, G., Tippeconnic Fox, M., & Lowe, S. (2005). Where we have been: A history of Native American higher education. New Directions for Student Services, , 7-15. Retrieved July 12, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=16381412&site=ehost-live

O'Laughlin, J. (2002). Financing of tribal colleges. Claremont, CA: Claremont Graduate University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED477415).

Pavel, D. M., Skinner, R., Cahalan, M., Tippeconnic, J., & Stein, W. (1998). American Indians and Alaska Natives in postsecondary education (NCES 98-291). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

Pember, M. (2006). Deal or no deal? Diverse: Issues in Higher Education, 23 ,

34-35. Retrieved July 12, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=23339550&site=ehost-live

Stein, W. J. (1999). Tribal colleges: 1968-1998. In K. G. Swisher & J. Tippeconnic III (eds.), Next steps: Research and practice to advance Indian education (pp. 259-270). Charleston, WV: Eric Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED427913).

Tippeconnic, J. W., III (1999). Tribal control of American Indian education: Observations since the 1960s with implications for the future. In K. G. Swisher & J. Tippeconnic III (eds.), Next steps: Research and practice to advance Indian education (pp. 33-52). Charleston, WV: Eric Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED427904).

World Indigenous Nations Higher Education Consortium. (Aug. 9, 2013). WINHEC announces World Indigenous University (WINU) . Retrieved December 19, 2013, from http://www.winu.org/WINU%20AUGUST%209%202013%20MEDIA%20RELEASE.pdf.

Suggested Reading

Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2003). Minority-serving institutions of higher education: Developing partnerships to revitalize communities. Washington, DC: Department of Housing and Urban Development. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED481028).

Fogarty, M. (2007). Commitment to building prosperous nations. Tribal College Journal, 18 , 12-17. Retrieved July 12, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=24095605&site=ehost-live

Freeman, C., & Fox, M. (2005). Status and trends in the education of American Indians and Alaska Natives (NCES 2005-108). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (ERIC

Document Reproduction Service No. ED485861).

Hernandez, J. (2006). Empowering students for success. Tribal College Journal, 18 , 12-17. Retrieved July 12, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=22182691&site=ehost-live

Martin, R. (2005). Serving American Indian students in tribal colleges: Lessons for mainstream colleges. New Directions for Student Services, , 79-86. Retrieved July 12, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=16381405&site=ehost-live

Oppelt, N. T. (1990). The tribally controlled Indian colleges: The beginnings of self determination in American Indian education. Tsaile, AZ: Navajo Community College Press. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED356108).

Ortiz, A., & Boyer, P. (2003). Student assessment in tribal colleges. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2003 , 41-49. Retrieved July 12, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=10159352&site=ehost-live