The Writings of Guy Bensusan
|
In this
issue we move to the story of how the Hexadigm developed. We find
a young and inexperienced Bensusan who learns to be sensitive
to the response of his students. His humility and concern lead
him to a new teaching paradigm that he has applied widely with
great success. Others are now adapting this teaching model to
science and other subject matters.
Guys
philosophy and practice have continued to grow with the advent
of new technology and the acceptance of distance learning as a
viable and effective alternative to traditional methods of teaching.
He is the master teacher, leading us into new paradigms of teaching
and learning. Through these writings he takes us on a journey
of exploration and discussion. He shows us how to motivate students
and achieve results with anywhere-anytime collaborative learning
that are the envy of most classroom teachers.
The Bensusan
Method is enriching the lives of tens of thousands of students.
Ed Journal is grateful to have Dr. Bensusan present this series
of articles each month so that you, your colleagues, and your
students can enjoy and benefit from his experience.
|
TEACHING
NATIVE AMERICANS
Guy
Bensusan
My first experience teaching
a course in which Native Americans were the entire audience came in1967.
I was at Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff, and the Director
of Continuing Education asked me to teach Mexican Arts, Ideas and Values
every other weekend at a small boarding school called Rock Point, just
north of the spectacular Canyon de Chelly on the Navajo Reservation.
Every other Friday at noon, I climbed into the University car, spent
four hours of windshield time avoiding horses and cattle on the road,
taught my class in the evening to twenty-five Navajo teachers, ate with
them, stayed overnight in the teacher's dormitory, taught again
in the morning, and drove home. It was a deep challenge to me at the
time, one which, looking back, was a milestone in my life --- an experience
which made me question pre-assumed truths and reversed my thinking about
the art of teaching.
But before this, my multicultural
life and later professional training had not prepared me for teaching
North American Indians. As the child of a mining engineer in upcountry
Brazil, I went to school with Tupí, Tapajós and Aymará
Indians who called themselves Brazilians; I grew up thinking all races
were "flesh" color. When we moved to the USA and drove west
on Highway 66, I met real Pueblos, Apaches and Navajos in New Mexico
and Arizona and I learned they were not like the "reel" Indians
I saw in the movies or was taught about in college courses. During the
1950's I received a superb education leading to a doctorate in Latin
American History at UCLA, though it too was flawed and misleading about
Native Americans. I was taught that the "Hispanic" aspect
of Latin American culture, even in New Mexico and Arizona, dominated
native culture. I was told that, except for isolated cases, where the
Indians had been "assimilated," their "difference"
from other Indians was due to the Latin influence!
Along with other students,
I was taught the outsiders' views of things as well as their standards
of evaluation; not the Indian stories of skies, plants, animals, symbols
or arts. Even my most sensitive professors often dismissed native ideas
as superstitions, local lore or unedified narratives, relegating Indians
to a status of quaint and odd. And who was I at that time to dispute
my highly- regarded mentors? I was not encouraged to study what natives
had thought or believed other than through descriptions by Spaniards
who wrote their own observations.
Even when I designed the
first year-long Humanities sequence on Mexican and Southwestern Arts
and Culture for the Bilingual-Multicultural Master's Degree Program,
we emphasized Hispanic things. There was so much more information to
offer, I thought. I bought a cowboy hat and boots, and became a westerner.
A zealous movie-goer, I became fascinated with Sedona, Monument Valley
and the many other locations where my favorite Westerns had been filmed.
Clambering about the sets, I relived and reinforced the misleading filmic
images, feeding my dis-education about the "Injuns" I joked
about in class. Navajos, Hopis, Apaches, Hualapais, Yavapais, Mohaves
and Pima who were students laughed along with us.
They responded with their
own anecdotes about "white eyes," but also about "Meskins
and Injuns." Yet these were not the people the movies suggested;
instead, they did their homework well and earned high marks on my tests.
They might be reserved and live apart at the Indian dorm, and they might
go off to ceremonies of various sorts for several days without saying
anything, but their course essays and projects were satisfactory and
often were highly competent. When in 1964 and 1965, I received Teacher-of-the-Year
awards as voted by the student body, I truly felt I was succeeding as
an educator. Naturally I thought I would have the same success out at
Rock Point.
Neither then nor now is Flagstaff
a noisy metropolis, so I did not feel I was going to the boondocks at
Rock Point, just out to the countryside. The most evident and immediate
challenge with the students was auditory, as they spoke so quietly.
I found myself asking them to repeat their responses until I could fine-tune
my own hearing. The same was true in their non-verbal communication;
slight movements of head, mouth, body, eyes and hands conveyed ideas
clearly --- that is, if one was paying attention.
I began by teaching them
what I taught on campus: Arts, Ideas and Values of Mexican culture,
popular, concert, and folk music, examination of Maya and Aztec artifacts,
a comparison of Mexican Festivals (Holy Week, Bullfights, Day of the
Dead, the Cinco de Mayo observance of a Mexican military victory in
1862), and the Folklore Ballet, recounting some folk stories showing
cultural traits and Hispano-Indian blendings, plus a study of icons,
designs and symbols used in ceramics, carvings and textiles.
Music and dance history evoked
smiles and some interesting comparative discussion, but much of my "best
stuff" simply flopped. They ignored my brilliant analysis of the
bullfight, the slides of Jesus-on-the-cross being carried through the
streets at Easter, the pictures of skulls and skeletons so common in
Mexican life. Navajo teachers would not even look at the screen, much
less discuss concepts of celebrating death or its many visual and symbolic
manifestations.
Their response to my presentation
on architecture and of my favorite Mexican baroque and churriguerresque
cathedrals was even more disappointing. It was clear I was not getting
through and my spirits were both shattered and mystified when the same
program so successful on campus was a failure here. I had no idea what
was wrong, plus my pride was in trouble. At lunch one Saturday, after
an especially dismal, morning session, I blurted out, "What is
wrong?"
They were silent for a long
while as I looked into each impassive, unreadable face. After what seemed
forever, Stella, the senior teacher who was in charge of arrangements
and always helpful and genial, responded. Looking at me squarely, she
said, "What is wrong is that you are making us do things which
are prohibited. When we look at or listen to what is taboo we must go
and be purified. Otherwise we will spread that evil. You wonder why
we are late on Saturdays. It is because we have a smoke ceremony to
cleanse us. We must not look at owls and skulls, or talk about death,
or tell and listen to tales and stories in the spring and summer."
"We know it is important
to learn about these other cultures, and we have an agreement with the
Education Department, but we are very uncomfortable. And even though
many of us, like myself, have Mexican names, we also have a long history
of hostility with both Spaniards and Mexicans. The overdecorated art
that you want us to admire shows us they are morally decadent and reminds
us of what the Old People (Anasazi) who were before us made. They decorated
everything much too much, and now they are gone."
"We believe it is because
they did not keep life in balance. We leave our pots plain and whatever
design it has when it is done comes from baking in the fire. We like
you and we must have this course for our teaching degrees, and there
is much we enjoy about it. But there are also many places where we must
endure what you are doing until class is over."
I was stunned. I had totally
miscalculated. There was a vast hole in my education and in my so-called
multiculturality, one that I had obviously fallen headlong into. Yet
true to my vocation, I tried to point out that they needed the course,
because at Rock Point they were isolated and should encounter the outside
world in order to deal with alternatives that would lead them to new
ways of seeing. I asked how they expected to teach their students if
they did not reach out. My feelings were more than a little hurt, but
when my rationale drew no response, I also realized that they as well
as I knew that I was mouthing academic officialese, rather than heeding
their explicit cultural warnings. I should have known better; I was
not a provincial yokel, I was multilingual, well traveled, able to function
in many societies and successful in coping with foreign dilemmas. With
my Ph.D. and teaching awards, I should be able to handle this!
I tried another tactic: "These
slides and lectures worked so well in Flagstaff. The Navajos in my classes
there looked at the slides, talked about the ideas, made comparisons
of Mexican culture with Navajo culture and even wrote about them in
detail. Why don't these same things work here?" Stella's
answer was gentle, sensible and obvious; "Why do you expect us
to be like Navajos who leave their culture to go to the city and become
like the Anglos? We live here."
How could I have fallen into
this cultural entanglement? I had just come up point-blank against the
wall every one of us builds within ourselves, one that has many doors
and windows, if we will only take the time, courtesy and respect to
open. After this lesson, so delicately presented for my consideration,
I now doubt if there is any possible way of learning all the ways there
are to deal with the "other" race or ethnic group, that no
one can ever be a true expert --- each one of us can only do our best
to be the most expansive and careful of others, hoping to be the least,
rather than the most, offensive.
I had not applied my own
basic principles, having created a generalization about an entire group
in which Indians were Indians everywhere. I thought about nothing else
during the long drive home: ethos-pathos, rights and rites, academic
curricular standards versus the sub-culturally diverse entitlement of
students not to have their ways and customs disregarded. I could see
and understand both sides.
In Flagstaff I consulted
with Roger Wilson and Milo Kalectaca, older Navajo and Hopi colleagues
with whom I served on a multi-cultural teacher education committee.
Their response to my questions was: "Have you asked the teachers
how they want you to deal with this difficult predicament?" What
a simple blockbuster: "Have you asked them?" Well, of course
I had not asked them --- I was the teacher!! They were paying me to
teach them! Why would anyone ask the students what they wanted to learn
or even what the teacher might best use as examples?
When I did ask, I was astonished
how simple and easy it became to by-pass this huge problem without sacrificing
the academic essentials. I only needed to release my ego, to inquire
about what created the student discomfort and substitute an equally
useful topic which would serve the same purpose of illustrating and
exemplifying our course principles. What I had chosen to teach about
Mexican Arts and Culture was what I already knew, was familiar with,
and enjoyed. I had concentrated on my needs rather than on theirs. I
needed to find something for class that would not be traumatic to on-reservation
Navajo students.
However, I still was not
ready to allow them to select their own topics within the subject matter
of the course. I did that for them, and what I chose worked well. I
still needed to listen closely when they spoke, and remembered to keep
my voice down when I got enthusiastic, or carried away singing and playing
the guitar. But what developed from that long-ago encounter was both
a revelation to me and a clear indication of the in-no-way-inferior
abilities of Navajo teachers and trainees to be creative in class and
express their ideas with useful examples and with wisdom. When the course
came to an end, the class members held a party and presented me with
a sand painting award which still adorns the wall of my office.
Teaching Indians is no different
than teaching any other ethnic group --- steps must be taken in advance
to insure one's lecture and display materials contain a minimum
of offensive subjects to the students. When an Anglo teacher first encounters
a Native American audience, it helps to remember that any one of the
Indian persons in the classroom may have lived in Europe for a couple
of years, or attended an Ivy League college, or mastered the art of
medieval calligraphy, or won distinguished awards in creative arts,
or is the son or daughter of an elected and esteemed "National
Treasure." I can provide a local name for each of these categories.
Too often the immediate response
to a Native American falls into one of several categories: (1) guilt
for previous transgressions, (2) nervousness in dealing with peoples
we have been taught to consider backward, and (3) asking too many questions
about their culture, beliefs, and customs. One way of coping with each
of the above challenges is or can be: (1) some racial groups persist
in keeping alive centuries' old feuds but many Native Americans
are quick to reassure that bygones will be bygones. (2) Envision the
Native American before you as having earned a doctoral degree, as being
a successful business-person, as someone able to speak three languages,
or be accustomed to wearing $10,000 worth of jewelry at once. (3) If
you feel you must inquire into personal beliefs, always ask first whether
this is a topic that an outsider may learn about.
As Stella had suggested,
I was wrong to assume that "Indians" at NAU in Flagstaff were
culturally the same as the ones at Rock Point. I set up a new three-
part classification: "Traditional" or rural, "Modernized"
or urban, and "Transitional" or an extensive dynamic stage
in-between. I needed to be sensitive and ask many questions about what
students were uncomfortable with when I taught on the Reservation, because
the classes were 90% or more Indians, usually "traditional."
On campus the ratio was different; there might be 5% Indian, hardly
ever "traditional." I needed to adapt to two different worlds,
so I was fortunate to live in both for a while and learn how to adjust.
Obviously, location is a major asset in teaching.
I now perceived Mexico as
well as the Southwest in a new light: on both sides of the border Native
culture had not only endured, but had exerted much more influence upon
European (Hispanic or Anglo) culture than had previously been suggested
by academe, government, popular magazines and the media in general.
All you had to do was look for the Indian imprint rather than the European
one. Even the early "How to teach" manuals for the different
ethnicities which appeared en masse during the 1970's were guilty
of this, though they fortunately treat the subject in more profound
ways now.
The other vital concept was
"cultural process;" continuing and accelerating change. I
saw analogies in the transculturation of Indians and Mexican Americans.
"Latin" students comprised several groups. Flagstaff's
resident families often related to New Mexican Colonials, many moving
west with railroad building. Other Mexican Americans came from lengthy
descent, whether in agriculture at Yuma, mining at Globe and Morenci,
ranching in Apache-Navajo counties, border business at Nogales and Douglas
or, the contrast of large numbers of big-city kids from Phoenix. A third
group were recent arrivals from Mexico or Central America, representing
many social and economic levels. Some Natives and Mexicans were closer
to tradition, some had lost it (along with language, stories and customs),
and many in-betweens were a little of this and a little of that ---
unsure whether to retain their tradition or go toward the mainstream.
Traditional content for both
my courses emphasized what was in the main stream. I saw the need to
change that and wanted an approach based on location, which would include
Native and Latin elements from both sides of the border varying the
fare and allowing Indian and Mexican American students to relate to
classroom topics that came from each of their own cultures. The bonus
was that they learned more by being able to see the other cultures having
similar challenges. My first efforts were two 1976 Bicentennial programs:
"Panorama of Mexican American Art," a touring exhibition for
the Museum of Northern Arizona and "Roots and Rhythms," a
series on Latin American Music for National Public Radio. In each case
we started with "Popular Arts" and then reached out to Fine
Arts and Folk Arts.
It was a start, and the success
of those programs led to the next step, developing what would become
the formula I currently use in the Interactive Instructional Television
classroom. Crystallized into its present form, I call it "The Hexadigm,"
an open-ended six-part schema for dealing with the on-going and complex
evolution of Native and subsequent cultures. In the following description,
the six parts are in capitals and are numbered. This is one way I have
found to be successful in teaching humanities to Native Americans, by
incorporating an inclusivist rather than particularist viewpoint.
Regardless of whether we
talk about the Southwest or any other part of the Americas, it is clear
that "Indian cultures" by 1500 were the consequence of many
successive (1) CULTURAL SEQUENCES of native groups for millenia, with
each new group providing and receiving (2) MUTUAL INFLUENCES, including
those by land and climate --- which had been there all along. These
two-or-more-way cultural adaptations would continue to evolve as each
new layer of culture came in from Europe, Africa and other continents.
At the same time, earlier
frontiers in each region related to natural factors, while later ones
became the arbitrary and politically-driven borders and boundaries we
now learn in national lessons. Location, climate, local history and
elevation coupled with ethnic ratios contributed to (3) REGIONAL DIVERSITIES.
While all cultures, regardless of era, had certain levels of technology,
the arrival of Spanish metal tools, livestock, new plants, diseases,
and new languages, arts, music, dance, clothing and religions deeply
affected native life, creating a most profoundly significant cultural
turning point for resident and newcomer alike. In Arizona and New Mexico
those influences came in a Northward movement from Mexico about 1600,
with follow-ups in the 1770s and after Independence in 1821.
After 1820, however, (4)
MODERNIZING TECHNOLOGIES, such as the steam engine for land and sea
transport increased the flow and speed of cultural change with ever-growing
numbers and diversity, once more changing the lives of Native, Mexican
and newcomer. In the 1870's, the pace intensified with railroads,
with Mexican immigrants during the 1910 Revolution, and with automobiles
and national highways in the 1930's. After World War Two came Sunbelters
(including me), retirees, seasonal visitors, plus global immigrants
and more Mexicans. The Southwest is no longer what it was either in
quantity or quality, especially for Native Americans.
(5) EXPANDING COMPREHENSIONS
resulted from all of these. Museums and study-centers grew, while changes
on the national level affected schooling, life styles and language.
People learned about each other, and World War II saw them go away together
and return with changed ideas. Flagstaff's Museum of Northern Arizona,
plus local monuments and parks, along with revived interest in Native
arts and cultures by academe, commerce and tourist development evoked
scholarly studies, motion pictures, magazines, videotapes and private
arts collections. The media today deluge us with Native American arts,
documents, histories and countless other studies, many of them by Indians,
and from Indian perspectives, even feminist.
Increased availability of
information and attitudes, as well as the new technology make it possible
to study the new resources in different ways. Watching films helps us
classify things we had only previously read about; greater collections
of recorded music establish an alteration of thinking about music and
how it might be best taught and understood. More information of different
kinds leads to diversity of methods, helps to subdivide fields of study
and multiplies the foci of scholarly interest. While pockets of cultural
and intellectual resistance remain, the way we have and are defining
Native American Studies and Native American life has led to (6) REVISED
INTERPRETATIONS about Indians, the final part of the Hexadigm.
The Hexadigm was successful
with Mexican American and Native American students, and also with "Anglos,"
in presenting an outline of a concept first, and then applying it to
art, architecture, music and dance. In every case, I began with the
Indian ideas and activities, then moved to the Spanish and Mexican ones,
and finally to the Anglos and what they had done. Rather than use standardized
tests, I encouraged students to write responses and reflections in their
journals, and turn them in to me every three weeks. I kept leading them
back to the six points, and asking them to discuss what they thought
was most important as well as what they found that bothered them. Each
respective audience could thus see themselves in our classroom activities.
This extremely important breakthrough made it clear that by seeing themselves
in the content of the course they gained a feeling of trust with the
teacher, which in turn encouraged or enabled them to participate in
and contribute to the class discussion. Teacher evaluations suddenly
rose, spurring me to go farther.
In 1979, I composed a verse
called "Past and Repast" which applied the Hexadigm to history,
culture and gastronomy. I printed out copies so we could read it together
in class; it made the students hungry, so was a big hit! I published
it in a couple of journals and conference proceedings, and I even made
a video of my "declamation," which was used in our Elderhostel
sessions. Year by year I versified about music, teaching principles
and cultural evolution as well as built collections of musical instruments
and folk art. I was pleased with the response to them and how well they
were received when I went to Western Carolina University on a National
Faculty Exchange where there were Cherokee and Lumbe Indians. Everyone
could relate to the materials and there was interesting discussion.
But the students were still not truly involved. They were an audience,
and I was performing. I was still only lecturing.
The change would come when
I began to teach in my first Interactive Instructional Television classroom.
Three groups of students were in classrooms 60 miles apart, and I could
only be in one of those places at a time. It was two- way video and
two-way audio, and he-she who pushed the microphone button first got
to say something or answer the question. Sometimes, if one didn't
like the answer, they would argue about it without asking my permission!
It was exciting, and lights went on in my head: why not build an entire
course out of student- discussion, with the professor setting up the
situations and helping to lead students through the complexity in a
Socratic method --- that is, asking questions, getting answers, and
continuing to ask more questions?
It worked, and step-by-step
has improved. Two years later I was appointed to a unique position:
Senior Faculty Associate for Interactive Instructional Television. The
job description said I should teach two courses each semester over the
system; experiment to see what interaction might allow in order to redesign
education; develop ways to assist other faculty to get started; and
help build the teaching side of what would become a statewide academic
program. It is clearly the most exciting job I have ever had in my 45
years of teaching.
We started with one remote
site, built two more, and by using a piece of equipment called a Four-Split,
could see and talk with all four classrooms simultaneously. The geographic
diversity also increased the number of Indian tribes we had access to.
Now we have gone to a Nine-Split (currently the only one in the nation
used for university courses) which has taken us to all parts of this
large state. It has been this innovation that has helped bring Native
Americans from so many different sites into greater participation in
the course.
Since IITV is so interesting
and I learn so much, I have scheduled two courses in each summer session
as well. I will teach my 60th fully interactive course in July of 1995,
and while courses in the regular semester enroll fifteen percent Native
Americans, in summers we get forty-five percent. Class videotapes show
that Indians interact, present ideas, debate points and definitions,
and bring out perspectives that other students have not thought of.
They even volunteer to give presentations on camera to the other classrooms,
and handle questions with good answers. I sometimes feign amazement
and say, "What's wrong with you guys, Indians are supposed
to be reserved, taciturn and be of few words. What's going on?"
They will laugh and say they are comfortable, having fun and learning.
We have even been able, once into the course, to introduce some of those
taboo topics and discuss them.
Why does it work? I think
there are several reasons, which are confirmed by Indian students who
take my courses, male and female, traditional, transitional and transformed,
and from many different tribes and regions. Part of it is the Interactive
Television --- all the students are intimidated by the technology, so
the playing field is equally uneven for everyone; they all have to learn
to use it from scratch. Several Indian students have told me it amuses
them to see Anglo students being scared, breathing rapidly, trembling
on camera and losing their composure. They say it helps their own sense
of competence, their resolve to improve and their willingness to contribute.
The method of starting our
American study with Indian arts and culture is of utmost importance.
By continuing to come back to what happens with the Natives as each
new cultural layer comes along, we have made their culture a focal part
of the course and opened up the chance for each of the several cultural
groups in the electronically-linked classrooms to discuss feelings and
reactions to the interpretations. Everyone's culture is in the course
content and we discuss all of the parts openly, including our feelings
and reactive responses. I tell students that I am multicultural and
share many of my personal experiences in arts and culture with them.
They reciprocate.
Two important consequences
derive from that: one is that students are listening to other students
in a classroom situation. At first there is some reluctance, but up
on the screen we rapidly get to know each other by name, and since I
arrange for us to be on the circuit before class starts, some students
even come to class early and strike up conversations with those in other
places. I have seen several Natives from one tribe or nation relate
well to newfound friends from another --- even discussing differences
in culture between tribes, which is listened to by non-Natives. The
other factor is the importance of geography, that is, location, elevation,
climate, ethnic ratios, cultural emphasis, etc., which becomes obvious
to the students as the discussion goes on.
Appropriate answers come
from appropriate locations, and this demographic reality is discussed
openly with such questions as, "well, is that more a product of
your culture or where you are living?" The subject under discussion
takes on many new dimensions as we examine it. For instance, one requirement
is that students take a field-trip to a park or museum and also engage
in an ethnic interview in order to broaden what would otherwise be an
exclusive reliance upon book sources. Consequently, in at least one
class session I will ask each site to talk about parks and other resources
that are available in their locale, or to go to other classroom sites
in order to see what they have previously only heard about. It is not
uncommon for a student who regularly attends at one site to show up
at another. When they do, students recognize them, talk with them, and
often socialize after class. Sometimes students from different sites
who have chosen the same project topic will ask to make their presentations
on the same day in order to cover the ground better.
The atmosphere is much different
from what I have seen in the more traditional single classroom. At the
same time, student ratios have changed extensively. In my electronic
classrooms on the Navajo and Hopi reservations I still have 90% or more
Natives, while on campus what used to be 5% has risen to 25% during
the fall and spring semesters. Summer Sessions bring as many as 50 percent,
since so many Native teachers come to campus for their residence requirements.
The overall ratios are equally altered. Last semester, for instance,
in a class of 90, there were 23 Native Americans representing 11 nations,
27 Mexican Americans, 2 Asians, 3 African Americans, 38 Anglos, and
7 international students, including a Mexican woman who gave birth to
a 6 pound, seven ounce daughter two days after the course ended. It
was a most interesting semester and we all learned from each other.
I am no longer lecturing
about Arts and Culture to the students. Instead, I find out early who
is in the course and what their interests are, altering specific topic
areas to take advantage of the knowledge individual students bring to
the course through presentations to the class. My role now is to help
the student develop the project and facilitate the exploratory discussion
about contexts, comparisons, causes, consequences and combinations.
During the past year, we had jewelers, rug weavers, basketmakers, dress
designers, musicians, sandpainters, apprentice healers and apprentice
museum curators in the course.
By asking that they help
us learn about what they do while also insisting that they pursue a
broader context of their specialty, we seem to make dual headway. One
highly traditional Navajo woman told me that she has come to understand
that her prior view of rugmaking was very parochial, and that the Spanish-Mexican
influence upon Navajo life was very profound --- which she says gives
her a much deeper understanding of her own weaving designs and related
cultural activities. Most significantly she wrote in her evaluation
that she had been closed to the idea until she had discovered it in
her own research.
Finally, the continuing development
of this interactive multicultural program is also aided by the dramatic
change in Native American outlooks, which have been with us since the
beginning of the 1990's, in preparation for the Quincentennial in
1992. Among the various Indian students who come into my courses now,
there is a new attitude of wanting to be heard, wanting to have their
culture known, and a willingness to discuss it. Some, of course, demand
the right to be the exclusive interpreters, in compensation perhaps
for the long centuries of having been defined by outsiders.
I still need to find better
ways to increase the students' reading depth and frequency, as well
as to encourage improvement in their timeliness of handing in assignments.
I would also prefer students to get over their initial inertia in getting
started with their assignments, and I would be happier if everyone would
stay for the entire course. These may come with time, however, since
each semester seems to be more productive. From what I see in my classroom
and read in the evaluations, mutually useful sharing goes on among many
races --- I look forward to seeing what will happen in the multi-site,
Interactive Instructional Humanities courses yet to come.
May 20, 1995
Some Useful
References
Three books which I have
used the most in regard to teaching multicultural courses are:
Edward H. Spicer, Cycles
of Conquest, University of Arizona Press, 1962 and several updates.
I have found this to be a useful starting place for my thinking on many
cultural and contextual topics.
Alfred Crosby, The Columbian
Exchange, Greenwood Press, 1972.
James A. Banks, Teaching
Strategies for Ethnic Studies, now in fifth edition (1991) from Allyn
and Bacon. The annotated bibliography is varied and valuable.
(Perry and Fraser's Freedom's
Plow, Routledge, 1993, moves along similar lines, but focuses upon African
Americans, Asian Americans and East Coast situations, a different world
from the Southwest.)
Three others I find most
useful are:
Carl Waldman, Atlas of the
American Indian, New York, 1985
Herman Viola and Carolyn
Margolis, Seeds of Change, Smithsonian, 1991.
Trenton and Houlihan, Native
Americans: Five centuries of changing Images, Abrams, 1989.
Arizona Highways (dating
back into the 1920's) carries a wealth of information on Southwest
Indians and statewide multicultural lore; Texas Highways covers similar
grounds but is more focused upon interesting places to visit. New Mexico
Magazine, Indian Artist, Southwest Art emphasize the art world. Native
Peoples, affiliated with ten major museums about the nation, is useful
in many cultural ways.
Whispering Wind Magazine
has been published since the late 1960's; editors Jack and Darlene
Heriard at Written Heritage (800-301-8009) also have a broad selection
of books, videos, cd-roms and cd's. Individual Museums also have
excellent publications, new materials all the time: the Woolaroc Museum
in Barlesville, Oklahoma; the Witte Museum in San Antonio, Texas; and
the Textile Museum in Washington DC, are very helpful. Museum of Northern
Arizona in Flagstaff has long published Plateau, which is superceded
by Cañon Journal.
University of Oklahoma, New
Mexico and Arizona Presses are prolific publishers of Native Americana,
while Chelsea House Publishers, Broomall, PA, has children's series
on Indians. A helpful reader is The American Frontier volume in the
Opposing Viewpoints series by Greenhaven Press in San Diego. PBS has
produced several videos on Chaco Canyon and various Indian cultures;
KNME (Albuquerque) produces many in the Colores Series; Interpark (Cortez,
Colorado) has an extensive catalog; Camera One in Seattle, Washington
has produced Wes Studi's Ancient America Series of five regional
surveys which both update and supplement the four video set organized
by Will Sampson under the title of Hollywood Massacre.
Finally, Bill McCune of Phoenix
produced "Indian" --- A History of Native Arizona.