Fundamentally Indian: The History and Development of Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) 1968–1994

• In Event: Researching Race and Ethnicity: Methods and Applications in the 20th Century

Abstract

Objectives or Purpose
The purpose of this paper is: 1. to analyze the development and proliferation of TCUs from the 1960s to the passage of the Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994, 2: to highlight how TCUs have advanced the goal of Native American self-determination through education; and 3: to examine the role of TCUs and the American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC) in serving Indigenous communities.
Perspective(s) or Theoretical Framework
This paper adopts a historical and socio-political framework grounded in the concept of Native American self-determination. This framework situates the development of TCUs as a response to the systemic exclusion and insufficient support of Native Americans in American higher education institutions (HEIs). This approach emphasizes the importance of culturally relevant and sustaining education and community empowerment as central to the establishment of educational equity in the U.S.A.
Methods, Techniques, or Modes of Inquiry
This historical analysis traces the development of TCUs from the 1960s to 1994 while also reviewing relevant policy and reports (e.g. the U.S. Senate’s Special Subcommittee on Indian Education report Indian Education: A National Tragedy—A National Challenge, the Navajo Community College Act, the Tribally Controlled Community College Assistance Act, and the Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act). This paper also examines the advocacy of AIHEC and several Native Americans to center Native American voices and document how AIHEC and numerous Native Americans contributed to the development and proliferation of TCUs in the country.
Data Sources, Evidence, Objects, or Materials
This paper relies on the following sources and materials: archival newspaper articles from the Navajo Times about the development of Diné College; scholarly articles from the Journal of American Indian Education and Tribal College: Journal of American Indian Higher Education; legislative documents, reports, and Congressional acts; academic catalogs from the TCUs; and records of AIHEC’s advocacy and coalition-building activities.
Results and Conclusions
My findings are: 1. TCUs, despite limited and inconsistent federal support, were able to open and expand in the U.S.A., and most TCUs are still in existence today, 2. although the Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act has been valuable to TCUs, the Act did not equitably support TCUs compared to 1862 and 1890 land-grant universities, 3. the annual appropriations, despite being modest and inequitable, have been, and continue to be, vital for sustaining TCUs, and 4. TCUs collectively maintain a mission to serve Indigenous students through holistic and culturally centered education.
Scientific or Scholarly Significance of the Work
This paper contributes to scholarship on educational equity and Native American self-determination. This paper also highlights funding disparities and the need for structural reform in higher education policy. Additionally, this paper offers historical insight into the role of federal recognition in legitimizing Native American controlled and operated HEIs. Finally, this paper strengthens current understandings of the intersection between education, law, and grassroots advocacy in Native American communities and in the development of TCUs.

Author

• Joey Shepherd, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign