The Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute

The concept of the Rural-Urban program emerged from our concerns as professors in a long-standing teacher education program which did not adequately address issues of minority teacher recruitment and more relevant preparation for diverse populations of children. We believed that our students would think more deeply about appropriate teaching for given populations if they had the opportunity to contrast student teaching in one setting with student teaching in another, very distinct setting. The long-standing program had established excellent links with the large urban school district, but had done little to address teaching outside of Albuquerque. Within the large rural areas of our state, impressive diversity can be found from one community to another.

We decided to take advantage of the uniqueness of particular rural communities by working with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Agency located closest to our University. This would allow our students to contrast the school lives of children in a huge urban district of more than 80,000 students with those in the small BIA schools on rural Indian reservations. It would further create partnerships between the mentoring teachers in the urban districts and those in reservation schools, affording veteran teachers opportunities to contemplate issues of diversity as well. We knew, however, that merely placing students in unique field assignments would not guarantee a change in their ways of thinking and behaving. Consequently, we added yet another layer of partnerships by recruiting American Indian students, partnering each one with a non-Indian student from the regular College of Education pool, thereby insuring that one partner would serve as a resource for the other in each of the two settings.

While the notion of partnerships between a university and a school is not unusual, the Rural-Urban program stretches partnerships far beyond the usual configurations. As our students work in two very different school systems, they can observe differences in administrative procedures as these relate to the day-to-day lives of children in schools. For example, the large urban district, while using standardized testing, emphasizes portfolio assessments. This contrasts notably with the heavy emphasis on standardized testing in the Bureau schools. Each emphasis impacts teachers_ choices for student work in the classrooms, with Bureau teachers devoting many hours to preparing their students for the test. Administrative decisions are also visible in the holidays selected for observances. The urban district tends to follow the standard prescribed American calendar while the Bureau responds to traditional Indian religious practice in the days it selected as holidays for children.

Schooling in varied communities may also be impacted by local governing bodes. In the Indian community the traditional leadership has much more direct input on the care and welfare of children and their families. Therefore, proposed program changes in the school must be clearly understood and approved by the tribal government. When schools decide to implement bilingual education in the urban school district, they only need approval from the school board. However, a bilingual program for reservation children needs approval from the school board, the tribal council, and in the case of New Mexico's Pueblos, from the tribal governor as well.

Following long-established practice at our university, we emphasize the importance of bringing the child's community into the classroom. Our non-Indian students' awareness of culturally sensitive issues increases as they work in the reservation schools. Like many novice observers of cultures, they focus first on physical, material manifestations; in the case of student teachers, the tendency is to translate these into teaching activities.

With the guidance of the Native American partner, the student teachers are able to create more culturally relevant learning experiences without giving offence. For example, many non-Indian students know that Kachina figurines are important in Pueblo Indian lives. Their Indian partners guide them in understanding that making light of these religious figures is a taboo subject in the Eastern Rio Grande Pueblos and steer them away from such projects as making Kachina figurines from empty toilet paper rolls.

At the heart of studying diversity and education are the children in the classroom. One of our non-Indian students made the comment that the reservation children carry their unifying culture and out-of-school relationships comfortably into the classroom. Their knowledge of the "ways of being" in the Native world translates into actions that impress all our students as caring and respectful of one another's well-being.

These children, members of a single tribe, diversified only by a small percentage of children from mixed parentage, contrast notably with those in the urban public schools with their far greater racial and cultural mix. Our students observed that although there was greater diversity in the urban school population, children tried to conform to "American-Anglo" norms in their efforts to participate cross-culturally. Paradoxes such as these become visible to our students because of the program's model.

Work with children contextualized in their communities also provides topics for mentor teacher seminars. Meeting bimonthly, the mentors from the BIA schools and the urban district have the opportunity to exchange thoughts and suggestions. At a recent meeting, one of the mentors talked about his difficulties with certain parents in the school's community, apparently resulting from his report of a possible child abuse situation some years back. Given the nature of the particular community, this single action, required by federal law, had rippling effect, leaving parents suspicious of his every action in the classroom.

Mentors in the cohort spoke from their own experiences on related matters. A non-Indian teacher currently working in a Bureau school spoke of her use of school personnel from the community to defuse similar situations. An Indian teacher shared insights that lessened the intensity of the problem, noting that trust might take time to restore but was a definite possibility. She went on to suggest some ways that this could be possible. Discussions of this type have enabled the mentor teachers who work with our program to understand their own situations better, as well as to gain insight into the various cultural backgrounds and even individual lives of their students. Like our student teachers, our mentors profit from cross-cultural contrasts, growing in their understanding that there is no single perfect approach to schooling.

The Rural-Urban Program has made great strides in reaching its three overarching goals. Non-Indan students, relating and responding to their Indian partners' world views and knowledge bases, expand their sensitivity and confidence in dealing with the range of cultural issues involved in working with the increasing diversity in today's schools. Indian students, encouraged and supported by their non-Indian partners, see themselves as capable of working in a world that extends beyond their reservation borders. Both Indian and non-Indian student graduates of the program have found employment in each other_s worlds and are functioning confidently and successfully in those settings.

Because of the pro-gram's partnering of student teachers, it cannot function without continued recruitment of Indian partners. As the program is in demand, even outside of our state, we are constantly interested in meeting Indian individuals who express a desire to teach. School paraprofessionals continue to be our best source of recruits because of their experiences with children and schools, as well as their ability to bring course credits they have received during school in-services.

For many of them, this opportunity to continue and finish college work in a supportive environment which specifically honors them for their cultural knowledge is a dream fulfilled. Mentor teachers, who previously have expressed a sense of isolation and lack of acknowledgment of their continued efforts on behalf of the children they serve, now find themselves as members of a supportive cohort. They are well-aware that their combined knowledge of working with cultural diversity far exceeds the book knowledge of the ivory tower university professor. Their expertise is not only recognized by their student teachers and their fellow mentors but also by the two of us as professors.
The program benefits all its participants, including the two of us. Working with students and mentors in thought-provoking, ever-changing, authentic situations has been far more rewarding than presenting the notions of culture found within the confines of the pages of a book.

Back to Table of Contents of the Fall 1996 Issue of On Common Ground