TEN YEARS LATER
A History of the Tlingit Culture,
Language and Literacy Program in
the Juneau School District
Annie Calkins, PhD
Program Evaluator
Winter, 2013
TEN YEARS LATER
A History of the Tlingit Culture,
Language and Literacy Program in
the Juneau School District
Annie Calkins, PhD
Program Evaluator
Winter, 2013
JUNEAU SCHOOL DISTRICT
CITY AND BOROUGH OF JUNEAU
Tens Years Later
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
History of the Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
What prompted the first grant?
Sealaska Heritage Institute goals and intentions
Program expansion
Goals and Objectives of three federal grants
Other grants and support
The Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Essential Components
Supplemental Services
The Teachers and Staff. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
How they were selected and hired
Program Staff at Harborview TCLL Program, 2000 - 2010
Teacher/Staff Reflections on the TCLL Program: Strengths and Challenges
The Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
How they were recruited, selected, and lottery issues Demographics, in and out migration
Student Reflections: TCLL program in their lives and education in Juneau
Program Leadership. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
TCLL District and School Administrators: 2000-2010
TCLL Advisory Board/Parent Advisory Committee
Juneau Board of Education
TCLL Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Process of creation, evolution of a lesson/unit template
Standards based, place based, culture based integrated units
Involvement of Elders in curriculum development
2
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
Tlingit Language. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Evolution of language integration within TCLL Program
Tlingit instruction
Scope and Sequence
Family Tlingit
Professional Development and Capacity Building. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Program staff training
Opportunities for training other district staff
Parents and Community. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Tribal leadership support
Family communications and connections
Family nights/events and parent conferences
Parent attitudes, gathered from surveys and focus groups
Community partners
Academic and Attendance Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Testing information, charts
Attendance data
Program Visibility. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Local attention
Regional, national, international presentations and presence
Best Practices and Enduring Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Program Outcomes and Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
ATTACHMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
1
TCLL Parent Advisory Committee Meeting Dates and Attendance
2
Family Nights: Themes, Attendance
3
TCLL Program Staff Training
4
District Staff Training
5
Brief Outline of Tests used in TCLL program
6
Comparative Charts of student performance: District CORE
7
Comparative Charts of student performance: SBA Test
3
Tens Years Later
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy program
in the Juneau School District program was started with a
federal grant awarded to the Sealaska Heritage Institute in
2000, with the original goal that it would become a “bilingual
immersion school” with Tlingit culture and language as
capstone instructional features. The District’s original
interest in the program was to study a cohort group of Native
students starting in Kindergarten, to see how their educational
career might differ from other Native students who do not
experience the same strong focus on culture and language.
Their goal was to identify strategies that impacted Native
student success, which had been a District priority for years.
The ten year history of this program contained in this report
reveals a number of positive factors that affect Native student
success. It also documents some practices that were tried that
had little if any impact on student academic performance. The
story of impact, on individual students and their families, one
elementary school, the District in general and the community
at large is rich, and reflects the complexity of the educational
ecosystem in Juneau.
The Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy (TCLL)
program enrolled 191 students in this “school within a
school” model program over its first decade. It began with one
K-1 class of twelve students on the first day in 2001, and grew
to encompass three multi-graded classrooms at Harborview
Elementary School, a related “all school program” at
Gastineau Elementary School and a satellite at Dzantik’i
Heeni Middle School, which was activated as students
graduated from fifth grade. This report deals primarily with
the original group of students from Harborview School,
following them from day one until the first group of ten was
targeted to graduate in 2011.
Three large federal grants fueled this optional District
wide program until the District began to assume more
financial ownership of its ongoing operations. The District
was in charge of recruiting, hiring and supervising all program
staff –mostly Alaska Native - and for implementing all grant
goals. The instructional focus of the grants was on improving
literacy skills, based on data which indicated that many
Native students in Juneau came to school without adequate
oral language suited to “school talk” and underdeveloped
pre-reading skills. The target was that at least 60% of TCLL
students would meet the District CORE expectations and be
Proficient on standardized tests of reading and writing. Growth
in language arts – reading, writing and oral language- were
tracked using an array of District and program tests. In general,
in more than half the years of the decade, at each grade level, in
Reading and in Writing, 60% or more of the TCLL students met
the District standards.
Another major goal was to develop curriculum and resources
that integrated cultural history, arts and literature with the approved
District curriculum, especially in science and social studies.
Program staff drafted a 4 year rotational cycle of curriculum units
tied to traditional seasonal and subsistence activities and reflecting
tribal values adopted at the 2005 Central Council Tribal Delegate
Assembly. The cycle was designed to repeat every two years
because classes were two year, multi-graded groupings. By 2011
there were 27 thematic units developed by the TCLL program, all
posted on websites and distributed to all school libraries in Juneau
and other interested Southeast districts.
Tlingit language instruction was the primary goal of the
Sealaska Heritage Institute. After years of limited instruction with
Elders this goal was actualized at Harborview. A team of linguists
and teachers drafted and revised a Scope and Sequence to guide
instruction, the first of its kind in the state. Assessments were
developed to track student acquisition of Tlingit. It was learned in
Year Ten that the program goal for students to use 100 Level One
words/year was totally attainable.” I encounter children on the
playground, hallways and restrooms who are using Tlingit words
with each other” – something that had not happened in decades.
Increasing family engagement in their children’s education
was paramount to the District, in recognition of a growing body
of national research declaring the positive effect it can have on
student achievement. Teachers spent more than is typical of
most teachers making personalized connections with parents,
grandparents and foster parents, urging them to make sure
their children were in school, and inviting them to cultural and
classroom events. There were 41 Parent Advisory Meetings for
the TCLL program between 2000 and 2010, and 48 Family Nights
where adults and children interacted. A significant outcome for
the program was the ways in which parents felt welcome and
comfortable in the school; for many this was a new phenomenon.
As the TCLL program experimented with techniques and
strategies, lessons were learned, and effective practices were
documented. Barriers and challenges were acknowledged,
with suggestions for improvement. The students and teachers
earned a positive reputation within the local and regional Native
community. Teachers were asked to present findings and successes
at state and national conferences. The program continues on at
Harborview School, evolving each year to meet the needs of
enrolled students and families.
Implications from the ten year review are now on the table
for further discussion and action on the part of the District and the
Tribe. Systemic, sustainable change that would ameliorate some
of the inequities still felt by Native students and families remains
an elusive goal. Additional research topics suggested in this
report are waiting for further study, as the issue of Native student
success must continue to be a priority for the District, and for the
community of Juneau.
4
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
INTRODUCTION
schooling that they fiercely care about. It influenced its
host school – Harborview – and inspired other schools
like Gastineau Elementary School and Dzantik’i Heeni
Middle School, along with schools throughout the region,
the state, and the Yukon Territory. This report is meant to
illuminate the history in some detail, so that others may
learn how the program took root and spread, and what the
In 2000 the Sealaska Heritage Institute, in partnership
with the Juneau School District, launched a pilot program
in Harborview Elementary School that over the next
ten years would make an unprecedented impact on the
District. The program was designed to turn the tide of
low academic performance and family engagement of
Alaska Natives by creating a place based, culture based
“school within a school” where the Tlingit language and
culture were integral to daily instruction, where they
were celebrated and respected. This report describes the
first ten years of operation of what is now known as the
Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy (TCLL) program.
Sustainable educational change takes a long, long
time. The process is complicated and oftentimes
messy. In cases like the TCLL program development,
it was rowing with, and against, the tide of educational
trends, state and federal regulations and the impact of
other district programs. Change takes patience, strong
leadership, and time for an innovation like the TCLL
to take root, to affect the ecosystem of a complicated,
sometimes byzantine school district structure. Changing
the culture of a system that has grown over decades takes
decades to alter.
The first ten years of the TCLL program are a
testimony to the adage that “there are no easy answers to
complex issues.” This history is an excellent illustration
of how you try something new, self assess, analyze, find
best practices, abandon what is not working, and move
on. In the analysis some things fall away, some stay, some
evolve and become systemic. Significant educational
change takes a keen clarity of vision that can hold on
through the tides of program evolution.
The TCLL program has had a profound influence
on the education and lives of Native students and their
families. It has also profoundly affected the District, with
the proliferation of cultural curriculum and resources,
culturally responsive and transformative teacher training,
increased graduation rate of a cohort group of Native
students, the possibility of Native student test scores that
are equal to non-Native peers, the presence of Elders in
classrooms and authentic Native parent engagement in
A lasting lesson from the first decade of the program is
the need to consider how things besides test scores really
do matter for Alaska Native student success – leadership
skills, having a strong voice, preserving your indigenous
language, personal and cultural pride, creativity, self
confidence, contributing to family and clan, self direction –
these things echo and amplify the traditional tribal values
of the Tlingit and Haida people from time immemorial.
outcomes were after ten years of work.
A lasting lesson from the first decade of the program
is the need to consider how things besides test scores
really do matter for Alaska Native student success –
leadership skills, having a strong voice, preserving your
indigenous language and values, personal and cultural
pride, creativity, self confidence, contributing to family
and clan, self direction – these things echo and amplify
the traditional tribal values and perspectives of the Tlingit
and Haida people from time immemorial. After ten years,
knowing what we do now about the impact a program
can have, it is prime time to broaden our talk about
educational outcomes for Native students in Juneau.
5
Tens Years Later
HISTORY OF THE PROGRAM
and segments of the Native community.
The Sealaska Heritage Institute was awarded a federal
grant from the U.S. Department of Education, Office of
Bilingual Education on November 1, 2000 with the goal of
creating and piloting a bilingual immersion program within
the Juneau School District over a three year period. SHI
leaders met with Assistant Superintendent Drew Alexander
to initiate a working relationship with the District. A
timeline was mutually agreed upon with the goal of hiring
a teacher in spring, 2001, because it was not possible to
launch a new program after the school year had begun. The
District agreed to hire the teaching position; the Institute
would hire a Cultural Specialist, each organization following
their approved recruiting, hiring and evaluation procedures.
During those meetings it became abundantly clear that
at that point in time an authentic “bilingual immersion
program” was impossible in the District. There were no
certified teachers who were also fluent, or semi-fluent
speakers who could teach the class imagined. The planners
moved to a model where Alaska Native classroom teachers
would team with respected Elders who would teach teachers
and students alike within the school day.
What prompted the first grant?
In 1996 the Office of Civil Rights conducted a
comprehensive investigation of the Juneau School District
after a report was made regarding the over-enrollment of
Alaska Native students in Special Education, particularly in
the area of Speech and Language. This action alerted many
Native families to perceived inequity in the education of
their children, including a small and vocal group of parents
who began designing a charter school whose mission was
to meet the academic needs of Native children as well as
incorporating culture and language as prominent features.
A number of Native parents, some of the charter school
advocates among them, served on district committees
convened to address the action plan mandated as a result of
the OCR investigation.
One action of the multi-faceted, multi-year district
response was to engage in a national research project with
the producers of the Test of Oral Language Development
(TOLD), one of the key assessment whereby young children
were identified as students in need of special services.
Native parents worked with test publishers to replace any
test items that they considered biased from their cultural
perspective. In this research study, 92 Alaska Native
children aged 5- 8 were tested using the TOLD along with
non-Native peers. Norms for local Native students were set
for each of the six sub-tests, as part the comparative analysis
of their performance to the national norm group and to local
non-Native students. The final analysis showed that Native
children entering Kindergarten were one standard deviation
off from non-Native counterparts. They were coming to
school with a different range of vocabulary that did not
reflect that of other children entering school. In general, they
did not have the “book talk”, “school talk” that many other
children had.
The District begins the Program and Enables its
Growth
The Juneau School District had long recognized the fact
that the discrepancy in test scores, attendance and other
academic indicators between Alaska Native students and
non-Native peers could be vast. As a result, the District’s
Strategic Plan typically had one Strategy focused on
improving the success of Native students. Interventions
were designed and delivered, usually at the secondary
level where students were routinely tested, drop out rates
were calculated, and graduation rates were publicly shared.
Despite Action Teams with the best intentions crafting
potential interventions, the gap in performance between
Native and non-Native students did not substantially narrow.
When approached by the Sealaska Heritage Institute to
try a different approach, the decision was made to identify
one small cohort group of students from the start, support
them through elementary and middle school years and track
them to see what interventions, strategies and activities
made a difference. This retrospective report describes what
happened over a ten year span with this cohort group of
students.
From the start, the Program was open to all students
in the District, with special outreach to Alaska Native
students. It was a designated “District program” in that the
District recruited and hired qualified staff, and provided
supervision/oversight by a Central Office administrator who
did regular updates to the school board. In its early years
Program staff were considered district wide employees; they
eventually became building level employees when issues
relating to transfer rights arose. In a later meeting with
Sealaska Heritage Institute’s intentions and goals in
the first grant
As the district worked to meet the legal mandates of
the OCR investigation the Native community continued to
talk about the needs of their children in the large Juneau
school system, one in which many of them had also been
students. The Sealaska Heritage Institute (SHI) determined
that creating an immersion program/school where Native
students would learn their language and culture as a regular
component of daily instruction would go far in ensuring
stronger ownership by parents, improved academic success
and promote language preservation - one of the Institute’s
primary goals. Research from bilingual immersion programs
in New Zealand and Hawaii fueled the ideas within Sealaska
6
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
Superintendent Peggy Cowan in April, 2003 the meaning of
“District program” was confirmed and has held true since
without significant change. Establishing this identity within
the District led to other consequences as the Program took
shape. The Program has had several names over the years,
usually depending on the grant source; for the last four years
it has been officially called the Tlingit Culture, Language
and Literacy Program (TCLL); it will be titled this
throughout this report.
In January, 2001 Alexander, Sandy Samaniego,
Education Director at SHI, and others met with Juneau’s
six elementary principals to describe grant goals and
possibilities, seeking their interest in hosting such a
demonstration project, which would start with one K-1
classroom and include one additional grade each year. In
March and April, similar presentations were made to Site
Councils at Glacier Valley, Gastineau and Harborview
Schools.
The Harborview Site Council subsequently approved
a motion to host the program. In late March Kitty Eddy,
veteran Harborview teacher, and Nancy Douglas, Indian
Studies Resource Specialist at Harborview agreed to serve
as the Program’s certified teacher and teaching partner.
Florence Sheakley was contracted by SHI to provide Tlingit
language instruction, as she had previously done in local
Head Start centers. Alexander announced his resignation
that spring and Sasha Soboleff, a Special Programs Director
in the Central Office, was put in charge of the emerging
Program.
The Juneau Board of Education endorsed Harborview as
the selected site for the Program in May, 2001. All incoming
Kindergarten students from Harborview were invited to
enroll in the program by Principal Bob Dye. Nine enrolled.
In June, Alaska Native families from outside the Harborview
attendance area were invited to enroll, through community
presentations and informational meetings. On the first day
of school there were 12 children in the Program class;
after one month there were 14 and the first year of
operation, 2001-2, closed with 18 K – 1 students, 72% of
whom were Alaska Native.
Starting as early as October, 2001, a Three Year Plan
for the Tlingit Language and Culture Program in the
Juneau School District was carefully developed by staff
and administration to project enrollment, staff needs,
space and transition issues as the program expanded to
3 elementary classrooms slated to begin in the 2004-5
school year. Throughout Year One there were bi-monthly
program team meetings w/ Harborview and SHI staff, to
“share concerns about individual children, material and
supply needs, frustrations with computer operations and
plans for future events. The meetings were generally most
helpful to the teachers when the whole team was present
and when there was some structure, including agendas
and timekeeping.” A similar schedule of meetings was set
for Year Two. Attendance by both entities at these team
meetings eventually began to wane. By the end of January
that year there were no longer any notices of meetings and
the teachers were the only ones in the room at the predetermined times.
In February, 2002 the Superintendent announced that
the program would expand by adding a 2 – 3 classroom IF
there was enough parent interest. By late April there were
39 children on the K-1 list and 21 on a 2 – 3 class list, which
resulted in the creation of a waiting list and the need for
a lottery procedure for student selection for the program.
This was evidence enough of continuing interest within
the community to ensure the life of the Program within the
District. A lottery process, modeled after one used in the
Fairbanks School District and reviewed by the District’s
legal counsel, was put into place.
Program Expansion
“Rather than asking why this program should
continue, the question is how can this program be
offered to more students. Why would this enthusiasm
for learning not be allowed to be developed in other
children?
In addressing the issues on Alaska Native student
education, the drop-out rate, the success rate, etc.
a program such as this builds a strong foundation
for students to learn to enjoy school. They learn to
respect themselves and each other. Building this
strong foundation at the start of education can help
the students continue to be successful in school,
because they will have learned that they can enjoy
learning. They will have learned that school is not a
place to be afraid of because they are Alaska native.
I want this kind of positive learning environment
for my daughters, my nieces and nephews and my
friends’ children. I want this kind of environment
because my family is living with positive impacts.
I want this kind of environment because I have
experienced the negative impacts”.
—TCLL Parent Surveys from the early years
In January, 2003 the new Superintendent directed
Central Office staff to prepare a new grant proposal to the
U.S. Department of Education to accommodate anticipated
growth. The proposal was successful and funding was
granted (See next section). The program expanded. As
students moved up in the grades another grade level was
added, through fifth grade. There was also talk at this time
of eventual expansion to another school in the Valley,
at the urging of parents who were not able to provide
transportation to Harborview, which was required for
students who lived outside the Harborview attendance area.
In 2006 another three year Alaska Native Education
7
Tens Years Later
Harborview teachers had mixed responses to the notion
of partnering with each other. One teacher replied that
in partnering for basic skills instruction “ the changes in
classroom culture were too dramatic to be the best thing
for the kids” Others wrote “ It gave students a chance to
work with peers at the same level” “ They get more timeefficient instruction, to meet new friends and to work with
another teacher.” “It builds community at Harborview”
“I choose to do this to “create meaningful, authentic
learning opportunities, share the work load of planning and
preparing lessons and activities.” One teacher summed it up
- “these relationships are complex.”
Staff meeting discussions throughout the spring included
brainstorming issues and future possibilities “ How do we
make the program sustainable?” “What does success really
mean?” What do we want at Harborview?” “What would
be different if Harborview were to embrace Culture at the
CORE of who we are?”
As staff met to discuss the future of the TCLL program
so did parents. A Family Night was scheduled to talk
with TCLL parents about the future and solicit their input.
Site Council meetings in April and May included time to
discuss the idea of expanding TCLL by partnering teachers
together. Principal Stoltenberg “discussed the strengths
and weaknesses of the program, such as the strong sense of
community afforded by the program but relayed his concern
that many students in the program are not meeting the
CORE.”
In May, 2008, an all day staff planning meeting was
held to talk more about TCLL expansion, review all class
lists, explore partnering for math and reading instruction,
and scheduling Tlingit instruction and Family Nights. The
school year ended without any definitive plans set.
On September 2, 2008, a letter went out to all
Harborview parents informing them that the TCLL program
had expanded; “instead of three classrooms, six will be
participating this year…This year your child will be taught
using the District curriculum with a special focus on Tlingit
culture, language and the local environment.” In two of the
three paired multi-graded settings there was no comment
from parents. In one setting there were strenuous objections
from several parents, resulting in the dissolution early on
regarding any emphasis on Tlingit culture and language in
that classroom. Had parents been informed much earlier and
given the opportunity to get more details about what such a
pairing meant for their child the resulting tension might have
been resolved. In the end, in Year Nine (2008-9) two of the
three TCLL teachers teamed with two interested colleagues,
sharing groups of students across classroom settings to teach
social studies, science and math. These voluntary partner/
teams had no dedicated time to meet and plan outside of
general program staff meetings, which tended to focus
largely on upcoming Family Nights. Without time to plan
authentic integrated lesson delivery and share the needs
Program grant was awarded to the District, to continue
the program through middle school grades and to expand
to another school, as parents and community members
had requested. Because Gastineau Elementary School
had previously petitioned District administrators to
initiate a school wide model for cultural immersion and
Tlingit language instruction, it was selected as the second
elementary school. Dzantik’i Heeni Middle School became
the middle school location and continued “the program” by
offering one elective class “Cultural Life and Leadership”
to former HBV program students, along with tutoring,
professional development for middle school staff and home/
parent communications and advocacy.
Though both schools implemented components of the
developing Harborview program, this report does not
describe in depth their accomplishments and challenges;
that is left for future reporting, as each school’s story
deserves attention and depth of analysis.
In winter, 2008, staff and parents realized the end of
the Expanding on Excellence grant (Grant #3) would end
and again they needed to assess its impact and the current
needs of students and families. Beginning in late February,
meetings among the Superintendent, Program Coordinator,
Principal and staff focused on the current status of each
grant goal. They generated a set of questions including:
How will program changes affect the general Harborview
population? What are program models that we can look at
for Harborview as a whole? What do we want to see in the
transition year (from having grant funds to having no grant
funds)?
The Superintendent stated that “there needs to be
assurance that there is culturally relevant curriculum in
all classrooms at Harborview”, and that “it is important to
let everyone know that the program is not disbanding or
She
dissolving. There is support from the District…” directed the group to devise a long range plan, and discuss
options such as 1. Keep the program as it is. 2. Make minor
changes, including a review of the role of para-educators in
the building. 3. Set up a collaborative partnering situation
among teachers/classrooms and 4. Embark on a school wide
program, similar to that of Gastineau.
The Evaluator subsequently made a presentation to all
Harborview staff on the history of the program to date,
federal grant goals/objectives, and the four options outlined
at the meeting with the Superintendent. Staff was asked to
individually indicate which option they preferred.
A “Partnering Survey” went out to all staff during this
time, asking such questions as In what curriculum area
do your students partner with another class? Why did you
choose to partner? How did it benefit students? The multigraded classroom teachers had the most to say about the
benefits of partnering:
8
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
of individual students, the potential for success and any
movement toward a more school wide model - that had
been discussed by Harborview staff for months - was not
achieved.
By the end of Year Nine (2008 – 9) no further plans were
made concerning any expansion of the TCLL program by
pairing teachers with each other. The program was slated to
continue “as is” with the original model of three classrooms
for the 2009-10 school year, with no additional federal
funding available to support the program. The District was
to be responsible for maintaining and sustaining program
components.
Then in fall, 2009 the Goldbelt Heritage Foundation
was awarded an Alaska Native Education grant. Called
Wooch Een the project design built on the Harborview
model/resources in order to expand cultural, place based
curriculum and professional development into at least four
other Juneau schools. The Goldbelt Coordinator agreed
to fund the TCLL program’s Literacy Leader and Tlingit
teacher at Harborview, and the District agreed to pay for
Elder involvement. The Wooch Een grant would provide
the services of three district wide Culture and Language
Specialists, when they were requested by the Harborview
staff.
In spring, 2010, Year Ten, a meeting with the Assistant
Superintendent, Principal, one TCLL teacher and an Elder
occurred, to come to key consensus about next steps for
the program. They agreed to host four family/community
meetings in April, to gauge interest in moving from a K- 5
to Pre K – 4 program, as had been suggested as a way to
bolster readiness skills of children entering the program.
Discussions with parents about the move to a “school wide
program at Harborview” under guidance by the District
followed. Notes from those sessions included parent
comments that typified general feelings:
In May, 2010, pairs of Harborview teachers were
interviewed to talk about the integration of Tlingit culture
and language into Social Studies and Science units, and
what support regular classroom teachers would need, to
more fully implement TCLL curriculum units and other
place based resources. A list of ideas was compiled and
shared with Goldbelt Heritage Foundation, to help guide
cultural/language support in the 2010-2011 school year and
beyond.
At the end of a decade the TCLL program included the
three multi-graded classrooms at Harborview, with support
from a full time Literacy Leader and a Tlingit language
teacher along with an Elder and periodic presentations by
cultural specialists. Cultural curriculum units were used
at the discretion of each teacher. Family Events were less
frequent than in early years.
“If this program goes away where will I put my
children?“
“I don’t want school wide because I’ve been in
another school and they have a hard enough time
keeping the Indian Studies people on staff – lost three
people in two years.”
“We expect cultural standards in every
classroom….our goals are working toward an all
school model, so that children, families and elders
have a sense of belonging. What you are suggesting
for next year is a drastic change so quickly, families
will be upset.”
“The community would also be upset – it would be
good to review this idea with organizations vested in
the program.”
“The program is at risk because with too much
change there may be more staff turn over.”
9
Tens Years Later
Goals and Objectives of Major Grants and
Program
Grant #3
Expanding on Excellence (EoE) (2006 – 2009)
($1,879,470)
There were three consecutive grants supporting the
development of the TCLL Program, awarded by the Alaska
Native Education Program and the Office of Bilingual
Education in the U. S. Department of Education. The
original grant was awarded to the Sealaska Heritage
Institute; the others were awarded directly to the Juneau
School District.
A glance at the primary goals of each grant helps us
understand how grant goals shaped and defined the program
over the years.
• Expand current program to one additional elementary
school, adapting it to fit an all school implementation
model;
•
Expand current program services – academic and
cultural supports – to Dzantik’i Heeni middle school
students;
• Refine and target academic and cultural support systems
for K-8 Alaska Native students, based on longitudinal
evaluation data and information, and parent input;
Grant #1:
Improving Educational Opportunities and
Achievement with Alaska Native Students (1999- 2002)
• Develop and disseminate thematic curriculum to
interested Southeast districts;
• Implement family support systems for a minimum of 50
parents/other Alaska Native parents/year;
($800,884)
• Develop a quality Tlingit-English bilingual/
bicultural education program for grades K-1 with an
emphasis on language and reading skills.
• Develop Tlingit language curriculum, related
assessments, and materials to implement Tlingit
language instruction, along with a series of Tlingit
cultural activities.
• Pilot a bilingual/bicultural education plan,
standards and curriculum through implementation
phases for grades K – 1.
Other Grants and Support
• Conduct an extensive evaluation and disseminate
findings to a wide audience.
Throughout the ten year cycle the TCLL team
sought additional funding to support student and family
needs and some of the supplemental services outlined above.
They included:
Original Grant Academic Goal = 60% of students
meet or exceed district academic standards.
2003
AFN Wellness grant awarded to fund/support
family activities
Grant #2:
Building from Excellence in partnership with
Tlingit Haida Central Council, Sealaska Heritage
Institute, University of Alaska Southeast (2003 –
2007) ($1,497,551)
2007
ANB Grand Camp Scholarship Committee
donation ($2,500) - for snacks.
2007
First Alaskans Institute grant ($28,000) - in
collaboration with CCTHITA, provided After
School Girls Club activities 2 days/week
• Increase literacy skills of Alaska Native students through
a series of instructional supports, thereby increasing
their performance on standardized tests, state level
assessments and other measures.
2008:
Tlingit Haida Central Council Employment &
Training Department donation
($9,000) - for Family Nights, snacks and supplies,
lice removal services and purchase of cultural
books for students
• Develop a model for a culturally relevant, academically
focused program from preschool through grade 5.
• Develop culturally appropriate parent education sessions
and supports for the literacy skill development of their
children and families.
• Produce culturally based thematic curriculum and
provide regular staff development in literacy strategies
and language acquisition.
• Conduct an extensive evaluation and disseminate impact
and results on Native student performance and family
literacy.
10
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
Literacy Support
THE TCLL PROGRAM
A full time Literacy Leader, dedicated to working solely
with TCLL students, was included in Grant #2, after staff
presented repeated examples of the need for extra early
reading support. The position was advertised in 2003 to
attract someone with extensive background in early literacy
and effective strategies, like those of Reading Recovery,
which had shown positive results with primary students in
Juneau in the 1990s. The Literacy Leader (two over the ten
year period) provided one-on-one tutoring for K-1 students
most in need, and small group support to others. She worked
with students in the other two classes at teacher request, and
as time was available.
For one year, (Year Five) the Literacy Leader’s daily
schedule shifted away from 100% instructional support to
curriculum development, due to what had become a dire
need for culturally appropriate materials to teach with. This
shift resulted in a proliferation of cultural materials and
curriculum units, which had been lagging in the production
schedule set by grant goals. In the following year, the
position was re-directed to literacy instruction in the
classrooms.
Essential Components
From inception the program has at its core the
following components, advertised in recruitment
brochures and promotional materials used at
conferences and presentations.
1. Hands-on, Active Learning
2. Strong Cultural Curriculum
3. Strong emphasis on Reading, Writing,
Listening and Speaking
4. Daily (when possible) Instruction and
Practice in Tlingit language
5. Extra academic supports/
Supplemental Services when needed
6. Preschool program, focused on
literacy
Take Home Literacy Kits and Books
7. Parent involvement, family literacy,
family Tlingit
In Year Five a series of 54 take home Literacy Kits, 17 of
which were culturally based, were adapted for use by TCLL
students and families from the Literacy Links preschool
program. (The Literacy Links program, based at Glacier
Valley Elementary School, was discontinued by the District
in 2004, when the enabling federal grant expired) Kits were
checked out through the school library. Over the ensuing
three years the culture based Kits were checked out an
average of 25 times/month. Several years later, using grant
funds, they were re-furbished; they were in active use until
2011, when interest in the Kits was low and there was no
additional funds to update their contents.
At all Family Nights in 2003 – 2006 each child/family
received or chose a book to take home, often with “Tips for
Reading” developed by project staff. At other times TCLL
staff made take home units and materials focused on reading
and writing. Weekly and/or monthly Family Newsletters
routinely included book reading suggestions, library tips and
highlights from literacy activities in the classrooms.
8. Community Partnerships
Supplemental Services
Individualizing support for each student and meeting
the idiosyncratic needs of each family was a persistent goal
of the TCLL staff. Some children needed a lot of social/
emotional and/or academic support. Some families were
a challenge to engage in the schooling of their child(ren)
There were years when improved attendance was the
prominent message to parents – simply –“we can’t teach her
if she is not at school. We NEED you to help make sure she
is at school every day.”
In addition to the special education services guaranteed
to all students identified in need of special services,
the TCLL program provided a number of instructional
interventions and supports during and outside of the school
day. As the TCLL staff learned more about the academic and
social/emotional needs of students through the years, grant
proposals included an array of services that staff and district
administrators believed would make noteworthy differences
in the education of this cohort of students. Some were more
successful than others, as is typically the case. The list of
services and activities described below illustrates the variety
of strategies and interventions implemented over the years,
the serious commitment of program planners to improve the
education of Alaska Native students in Juneau.
Preschool Support
Grant #2 included a preschool component, because
teachers repeatedly cited the need to engage families
before children entered school. This complemented the
program goal of increasing the oral language fluency of
incoming Kindergarteners. Beginning mid year in Year Six
the District hired a part time Preschool Literacy Specialist
to work with Head Start Centers, particularly the two
centers from which children tended to come to Harborview
School. This Specialist provided group literacy activities
11
Tens Years Later
at Head Start and individualized instruction to children
with needs identified by Head Start assessments such as
the Kindergarten Readiness Scales. She also provided
professional development for Head Start teachers and
coordinated the distribution of Literacy Links take home
materials. This position was discontinued at the end of that
school year, for a variety of reasons including the challenge
of working across two educational systems and the lack of
sufficient time to work with all Head Start children needing
literacy support.
and phrases, became part of the curriculum library for use
by TCLL teachers.
After the SHI grant expired, TCLL staff pushed for other
grant funds to provide summer camps, taught by certified
teachers. Grant #3 included one week summer camps for
Native students from both Gastineau and Harborview:
2008
2009
2010
36 children
25 children
20 children
In addition, CCTHITA offered Culture Camps at
the Tlingit Haida Community Center and program staff
encouraged students to participate.
Summer Camps
“Summer programs have been KEY for the little ones
– getting to know them before school starts and getting
connected with their families.” (Staff, 2007)
School Year Camps and Clubs
With the conviction that some TCLL students
would benefit from more academic time and more days in
school, TCLL staff orchestrated three school year sessions in
addition to what was happening during the summer.
In spring of Year One TCLL staff wrote two grant
applications to the Sealaska Heritage Institute and the
Johnson O’Malley Program at Central Council, to fund
two week summer camps for returning and new program
students. The goal of the camps was to “get children more
ready and prepared to start the new school year, and to
equip them with many experiences in the local environment
to talk and write about.” In August, 2001 (Year One) there
were 18 children participating in the two week camp held at
Harborview.
In fall of Year Two Sealaska Heritage Institute was
awarded a three year federal demonstration grant for
Tlingit bilingual summer camps for children ages 4-7 in
both Juneau and Klukwan. This grant sought to “improve
language skills of children in preschool or entering
Kindergarten in Juneau’s successful Tlingit K-2 program
and in Klukwan’s Tlingit K-3 program.” The rationale
for the SHI project came from an independent evaluation
released in June, 2002 which showed that by the end of
the second year of the TCLL K-2 program, students took
the Test of Oral Language Development (T.O.L.D.)1 and
“far outperformed” a group of Alaska Native students who
took the test in 1996, thereby “furthering the assertion that
environmental influences can indeed deeply affect academic
performance”. The grant, awarded in 2003, resulted in two
week camps taught by TCLL staff. (2004- 25 TCLL children
participated; 2005 -26 TCLL children; 2006 34 TCLL children)
One unique highlight occurred when Klukwan
campers ferried to Juneau to share cultural activities
with local campers and the following year when Juneau
children ferried up to Klukwan. A number of parents and
grandparents accompanied children on both trips, and
appreciated getting to know each other. The curriculum units
developed for camps, which included some Tlingit words
December, 2006 Winter Camp, held during Winter Break TCLL staff recommended students to attend this
five day session. At least eight of the possible ten
grade 2/3 students went at least three of the five
days.
March, 2008 Spring Break Culture Camp, funded by
CCTHITA. Eight TCLL program students attended
this five day camp.
In 2007 – 8 a Drumming Club met during the 30 minute
lunch time on a weekly basis with two TCLL staff.
They met a total of 19 times, with an average
attendance of 10 students in grades 1 – 3. By the
next school year (2008 - 9) there were 3 drumming
groups during lunch time, an indicator of strong
interest. The groups were discontinued in 2010, as
staffing changed.
Fast For Word
In fall, 2004 all program students were invited to
attend the District’s summer Fast For Word 5 week
intervention program, focused on Vocabulary and Reading
Comprehension. The program is designed to “lengthen
and amplify sounds for individuals so that the brain is
re-structured to hear sounds not previously available and
process information differently.”
In summer, 2005, 16 program students in grades 2 – 4
were formally referred for the Fast for Word program. Six
actually attended; three of them made significant progress,
as indicated by Pre-Post testing.
Beginning in January, 2006, Fast For Word operated as
an after school tutoring program at Harborview, targeting
4-5th grade students. Three TCLL students were enrolled;
two made significant progress.
1 The T.O.L.D. composite score comes from an analysis of performance on
six sub-tests – Picture Vocabulary, Relational Vocabulary, Oral Vocabulary, Grammatical Understanding, Sentence Imitation and Grammatical
Completion.
12
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
Homework Clubs
test taking skills, and did research and prepared materials
for Northwest Coast legends, biographies, weather, earth
science and regalia making units.
Year Two: TCLL teachers organized and taught an After
School Club that met 4 days/week, to review and reinforce
skills. The club began in winter and met for 4 months.
Year Four: Indian Studies staff offered Homework Club
2 days/week in the 4/5 classroom and 2 days/week in the 2/3
classroom. Cultural activities were also provided.
Year Seven: Homework Club was offered by one TCLL
staff and a Student Teacher from UAS, 4 days/week, for
6 targeted students who were not meeting the District’s
CORE. The club lasted five months, with an average
attendance of 4 students over the 40 session period.
Year Eight: Indian Studies staff began Homework Club
in January, 2 days/week for students in grades 2- 5. (Two
high school PITAAS students worked in this Homework
Club for 9 weeks. They worked with 12 - 14 different
students on oral reading, spelling, writing simple sentences
and basic computation skills. PITAAS students kept a daily
log that included comments about student effort and attitude.
(“He is reluctant to answer, but understands” “Makes
a good effort.” “Pretty good at counting his money”)
According to evaluations, Homework Club was a good
“training ground” for the PITAAS students.
Tutors and Mentors
A variety of tutoring and mentoring options were
implemented over the ten year period, for individuals and
small groups of students. In addition to academic skill
building mentors/tutors were there to offer social emotional
support and instill confidence.
Examples of this support service included:
2002
A Harborview primary teacher volunteered
to work with one student during her prep
time; two other children got individualized
support from the Harborview librarian
2003 – 4
Big Brothers/Big Sisters (BB/BS) read to 3
students in the grades 2 – 4 class once/week.
Even Start program staff from Gruening
Park tutored several TCLL students two
days/week after school or in the evening
2004 - 5 Two retired teachers, 2 mentors from BB/BS
and one adult volunteer provided mentoring
and tutoring in K-1 class
2005 - 6 Two high school PITAAS/FEA students
worked half the year, 10 hours/week,
tutoring students in the grades 2/3 and 4/5
classes
2006 - 7
After developing a formal job description
for Lead Tutor and Student Tutor to hire
PITAAS high school/university students,
one PITAAS high school student tutored in
primary class during the school day
2008 – 9
Two HBV Literacy Leaders worked with
students in 2/3 and 4/5 classes in addition to
the program’s Literacy Leader. This staffing
decision was based on data and supported by
the whole building.
Instructional Assistants/Cultural Specialists
Tutoring was also provided by grant funded
Instructional Assistants/Cultural Specialists, who were
important additions to the program staff. In detailed weekly
evaluations they logged time spent preparing materials for
teachers and/or students, lessons they taught to the whole
class, one-on-one tutoring, participation in TCLL staff
meetings and cultural presentations they gave.
As an example, in Year Seven each of the three
Assistants provided 30 hours of direct instructional
assistance/week to students, in addition to meetings and
materials preparation. To give a clearer idea of what
they really did - over a 13 week period the K-1 Assistant
taught 46 all-class lessons in reading/writing, co-facilitated
40 Morning Meeting sessions, provided 25 cultural
presentations using Tlingit language, music and art, and
taught 33 small group math sessions to Kindergarteners.
This Assistant also participated in Parent Conferences and
regularly called all parents with event reminders.
Over another 13 week period, the 2/3 Assistant taught
53 whole class and 70 small group sessions and provided
over 200 individual tutoring sessions where she helped
children with vocabulary development, dictionary skills,
reading, multiplication/division skills, writing conventions,
and presentation skills. This Assistant prepped students with
13
Tens Years Later
Teachers
TEACHERS AND STAFF
There were seven different certified teachers in three
classroom positions in the ten year period. When teachers,
and specialists like the Literacy Leader left the program they
did so for reasons such as transfers within the building to
“non program classrooms”, transfers to other Juneau schools
and moves out of District.
How they were selected and hired
The first TCLL program staff was recruited by then
Assistant Superintendent Drew Alexander and hired
following routine district procedures. After Year One,
any new positions were advertised and applicants
were interviewed by teams, that included the school’s
administrator, TCLL Program Director, other teachers and
sometimes a program parent.
At the end of Year Two, incoming Superintendent Peggy
Cowan, in consultation with the School Board, made the
certificated positions at Harborview district funded positions
(rather than grant funded positions) as a sign of support
for the program so that teachers from any building could
transfer into open positions. The District continued to fund
the teaching positions at Harborview.
Non-certified positions (Cultural Specialists/Instructional
Assistants, Preschool Specialist) were funded through
grants. Elders were funded by both the District and federal
grants.
Cultural Resource Specialists/Instructional
Assistants
These positions were designed to be positive role
models, help with take-home materials, help create cultural
units, assist with family literacy activities, and do individual
and small group tutoring. In Year Five George Holly,
Sharon Parks, and Carol Trebian were hired fulltime to work
in classrooms, with job descriptions addressing specific
objectives in Grant #2. As they sorted out their roles and
responsibilities and tried to make best use of individual
skills and communication styles, there were some tensions
among and between the Assistants and teachers. For the
Cultural Specialists/Assistants there was also the tension
having “two pronged” jobs- on the one hand delivering
cultural knowledge and on the other helping children with
specific reading, writing or math skills. “There is some
confusion among the Cultural Resource Specialists about
Program Staff at Harborview TCLL Program, 2000 - 2010
Year One
2000-01
Kitty Eddy (K-1), Nancy Douglas (Cultural Specialist)
Year Two 01 -2
Kitty Eddy, Nancy Douglas
Year Three
02 -3
Kitty Eddy, Nancy Douglas, Shgen George (2-3)
Year Four
03 -4
Kitty Eddy, Nancy Douglas, Shgen George, Kathy Nielson, Literacy Leader (hired mid year), (Michelle Martin, PITAAS student, part time Primary
Assistant), Hans Chester (part time) Chris Demmert, PITAAS student hired as Part time
Instructional Assistant (one month only)
Year Five 04 -5
Tisa Becker (K-1), Shgen George, Liz Miyasato (4-5), Kathy Nielson, Michelle Martin
(PITAAS student, half time Program Assistant) and 3 Cultural Resource Specialists (see
below) * Nancy Douglas was on leave, working for SHI as Elementary Curriculum
Specialist
Year Six 05 – 6
Kitty Eddy, Shgen George, Liz Miyasato, Kathy Nielson, Nancy Douglas, half time w/
SHI, half time as Cultural Curriculum Coordinator of TCLL program, Noelle Blanc (part
time Preschool Specialist, started in November)
Year Seven 06 -7
Kitty Eddy, Shgen George, Liz Miyasato, Kathy Nielson, Nancy Douglas
Year Eight 07-8
Kitty Eddy, Elizabeth James, Christina Dick (4-5), Kathy Nielson, Nancy Douglas, Jessica
Chester, (part time Tlingit language Specialist)
Year Nine 08 -9
Kitty Eddy, Elizabeth James, Christina Dick, Kathy Nielson, Nancy Douglas, Jessica
Chester (funded by Goldbelt Heritage Institute, GHI)
Year Ten 09 -10
Corinn Dean (K-1), Brenda Edwards (2-3), Christina Dick, Sheila Dyer (Literacy Leader)
Kitty Eddy (Cultural Resource Specialist, started in December, 2009) Jessica Chester, full
time Language Specialist (funded by Goldbelt Heritage Foundation)
14
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
Summaries of interviews were subsequently shared with the
Superintendent/Assistant Superintendent, and/or Program
Director, principals, and program staff, in order to improve
program operations and communications. Program strengths
and weaknesses were identified, along with sources of
satisfaction and frustration. Everyone interviewed offered
ideas for improvements and/or expansion.
Recurring themes emerged from a review of interview
notes and quotes, themes that offer advice to improve the
District program in the next ten years, and to other schools
and districts seeking to implement similar programs.
The following quotes and excerpts from interviews
exemplify staff perspectives on strengths and challenges:
their job roles and responsibilities which results in lack of
confidence for some and confusion for others.” (Evaluator
observation, 2005) Staff worked over the three year grant
period to deliver the services they were best suited for and
that met student needs.
From 2006 -10 David Katzeek was also a regular weekly
presence. Students gathered with him in the gym first thing
in the morning, in a communal “Morning Meeting”, to hear
traditional stories, learn songs, and be motivated to do well
in school. He helped build community and cohesiveness
among the classes and helped to make it a “program” instead
of three separate classrooms orbiting each other, which some
of the staff described as the accurate reality of the program
at times.
In Year Ten, with support from the Goldbelt Heritage
Foundation, Paul Marks and Fred White joined David Katzeek,
to give cultural presentations in individual classrooms upon
teacher request, and participate in cultural field trips.
Students and Parents: the Source of Great
Satisfaction, and Frustration for Staff
“Its all about the kids, sharing their triumphs and their
struggles.”
“This is a community - “a family” – Students care
about each other.”
Elders and Cultural Resource Specialists
In addition to TCLL employees Elders/Cultural
Resource Specialists were continually - but not consistentlycontracted to teach cultural traditions and language (See
Tlingit, page 27-29). Having Elders regularly present
depended on their availability and willingness, grant funds
and the coordination/support from program staff, most often
Nancy Douglas. Health issues, District payment procedures
and Medicare restrictions with Elders were obstacles that
were eventually overcome.
In Year Four Elders Paul Jackson, Ray Wilson and
Selena Everson worked up to 15 hours/week in each of the
three classrooms. The following year only Selena Everson
worked on a regular basis and in only one classroom. She
continued to do so through Year Ten.
In talks with Elders they voiced the need to feel that
they were helping the program (“I’ll feel better when I am
feeling really useful in the room.”) and contributing cultural
knowledge to students. Their work in classrooms was
difficult at times because of academic blocks or library/gym
times that cut into the time when an Elder could be present
in the classroom. Their usefulness increased when teachers
had sufficient time to prep lessons/units and knew what they
wanted from an Elder; without that Elder effectiveness was
reduced. “I am not being used to my capacity.”
Equity issues about Elder schedules arose at different
times, with teachers feeling like they did not all have equal
access to Elders, who were greatly valued.
“ The kids feel like ”this is their place” this is where
they want to be.”
“Children’s enthusiasm…they really WANT to learn”
“Watching students grow and mature over the years. It’s
fun to see them and have them come back to visit, having
a long term perspective on them, on the program”
“Other middle school teachers report, in writing and
in person, that the HBV program Native students
have more natural leadership skills than other Native
students”
“Student demographics are challenging”
“We need more male role models for the boys.”
“Over the years, the increase in the number of special
education students, poor students…profile of students in
program changed significantly.” “We need to establish a consistent routine for students
who may not have that in their daily home life.”
“We need regular Kids of Concern meetings back
like we used to have, to meet as a whole group and
strategize how best to help those children who need it.”
“Parents express their gratitude for our work.”
“At the fall Family Gathering more than half of my
parents showed up – it was
great.”
Teacher/Staff Reflections on the TCLL Program
“This is an intense program. I commit a lot. I try to keep
a balance in my life.”
“This year, I have lots of parent participation on things
like driving for field trips.”
Individual TCLL staff interviews were conducted
annually (except for Year Ten), by the External Evaluator.
15
Tens Years Later
Culture: An Exciting Focus and a Challenge
“There is a “little group” with some of us feeling that
we are not in that group - it causes friction.”
“Everyone is learning more about the culture and the
language, history, art and stories”
“I feel caught between the school and the program.”
Figuring out cultural curriculum “what is going to
be taught when” across the grades is a challenge”
“I want to be a PART of the program, not an Add On”
“It’s so much different than I imagined it would be.”
“A challenge is trying to provide authentic, place
based cultural opportunities without budget or
approval to “move beyond the school walls, or the
weekend camp model.”
“ It’s a challenge every day.”
“We are learning how to be a functional team…
people have figured out who and what is productive”
“Culture camp for teachers at Klukwan was amazing,
transformative.”
“We need to actually, honestly support each other
more”
“Its HARD to add culture into everything, along with
teaching basic skills.”
Program Vision
“There is so much potential in the program to affect
teaching and learning across the building.”
“I like the cultural units. Jessica and I are teaming to
teach them.”
“The District doesn’t hold or enact a VISION of what
we are trying to do here…”
Tlingit
“Developing a written Scope and Sequence, working
with linguists, Elders and partners – its hard, and
good.”
“The program is a good leadership program. It helps
kids be proud of who they are and where they come
from.”
Note:As of fall, 2012 none of the three certified teachers
in the TCLL program were Alaska Native)
“We HAVE a Tlingit Scope and Sequence – finally!”
“Excitement of children learning Tlingit”
“Hearing children singing songs in Tlingit on the
playground!”
Comments from interviews with the middle school
teachers reveal another perspective on students who had
been in the elementary program and then transitioned to
the more limited TCLL elective class offering at Dzantik’i
Heeni Middle School.
“When you tell the kids to “go home and teach
someone the language”, they do!”
Communications
“Communications, communications, communications
– with administration, with parents, with each other is the biggest challenge”
“These students are more engaged. I have watched their
self confidence grow.”
“We need meetings! With parents/community, staff
and the PAC about the future”
“ These kids have a sense of place that I have not seen
before. They walk proud. It has reflected in their academic motivation.”
“We really don’t talk to each other very often.”
“I saw one student, who had been in a bad crowd at first
and we thought he would be one of “the lost ones”.
Then this program expanded and I saw him begin to
respond to having a community. His pride returned and
he became interested in doing well academically.”
Administrative Leadership
“Need to clarify which administrator is doing what
and stick to it.”
“I don’t know who to go to.”
“Not knowing fiscal reality or grant budget makes us
unable to make plans”
“One student I know was having a very difficult year. He
learned to do things that he never thought he could do. I
think this program helped to save him.”
“She is in and out of our team, doesn’t have time for
team meetings. It is her CHOICE to be involved – or
not.”
“The TCLL support really encourages student to stand
up and actually speak… many Native students are not
involved in classroom discussions or speaking in front of
the whole class.”
“The Site Council is not really supportive. The
building Equity Leader is not really supportive. Leadership needs to pull it
together.”
“I like spending time with these boys because they are
fun, and respectful.”
Group Cohesion
“Building a collaborative team has been a rocky
road.”
16
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
THE STUDENTS
later showed the following in regard to their status with the
program:
½ year only, then moved to Hoonah
1 year only, then moved to Glacier Valley School
Less than two years, was moved to new foster home and
Glacier Valley School
Who they were, how they were recruited
and selected, lottery issues
Two years, then moved to Oregon, then back to MRCS,
HBV (not program),Washington State
Student Demographics, in and out Migration
In Year One, there were ten K-1 or 1- 2 multi-graded
classes in District elementary schools; two of those classes
had no Native students; the others ranged from 14% - 33 %
Native children in class. The TCLL class had 72% Native
students. The TCLL class had 3 times the number of Native
students than any other K-1 classroom in the District. This
trend continued throughout the decade.
In the first five years the program served a total of
106 students. Given the duplicated count for Years OneFive was 194, you get a sense of the in and out migration
from the program at Harborview School. In the ten
year period the TCLL program served 191 students.
(unduplicated count) There was a stable, continuous group
of families whose children – and grandchildren - were in the
program from the beginning, and continue to be so.
To illustrate the fluidity of enrollment in the program, in
first cohort group of 18 children in Year One, notes about
individual children and what happened to them two years
School
Year
Two years, then moved to different HBV classroom
1 ½ years, moved to Fairbanks, then Anchorage
Less than 1 year, moved to Valley, back in the program
following year
1 ½ years, moved to Valley
Overall in the last decade, as might be expected with
elementary school students, some left the Harborview
program because of changing parental preferences for school
and life circumstances. Reasons included such things as:
To attend Montessori class
Homelessness, and a move to live in the shelters
Transfers to valley schools, particularly Glacier Valley
and Riverbend
* In the early years lack of school bus transportation to town
from the Valley was repeatedly cited as the reason for leaving
the program. In later years this obstacle was cited less often
%
Alaska
Native
%
Special
Needs
%
Economically
Disadvantaged
% Limited
English
Proficient
Notes
00- 01
HBV TCLL
Program
Population
(end of year)
18
72 %
17%
44%
28%
3 had attended Head Start; twice
as many Native students as any
other primary class
01-02
23
74 %
22%
43%
57%
02-03
03-04
42
46
73 %
96 %
14%
15%
40%
52%
50%
50%
Expansion to 2 classes
04-05
65
90 %
20%
52%
45%
14 5th graders graduate DUE TO
EXPANSION
05-06*
67
90 %
24%
55%
24%
06-07
65
90 %
22%
46%
46%
07-08
58
93 %
21%
50%
35%
08-09
56
89 %
21%
48%
21%
09-10
61
87 %
21%
54%
13%
17
District changed ethnicity
identification upon enrollment to
include Multi-Ethnic
Tens Years Later
programs in Juneau were the natural place to find interested
students and families for the TCLL program. In the first
three years (2000 – 3) eight program students had already
had one year of Head Start, six had two years, and four
had received Home Base services from Head Start. When
asked, TCLL primary teachers did not find any noticeable
developmental readiness or gains in academics in the
elementary grades because of Head Start involvement
when comparing students who did not attend Head Start.
“Preschool did not seem to make any difference. For
example, only after 73 days of school can one child can
write his own name. And he went to preschool.” Over time,
specialized outreach and direct involvement with Head Start
decreased.
New foster home placements
Moves to Anchorage, Fairbanks, Southeast villages and/
or Down South
Transfer into “regular classrooms” in Harborview
As this group entered middle school, reasons for leaving
also included attending mental health or drug treatment for
longer periods of time.
For comparison, in Year Five, the District wide %
of students with Special Needs was 16% compared
to TCLL’s 23%, Economically Disadvantaged
students District wide was 23% compared to
TCLL 55%, and Limited English Proficient was
25% District wide compared to TCLL 42%. It is
important to note the larger percentages of TCLL
students in these three categories, as they affect
academic performance.
Lottery Procedure
As described above in the History of the Program, when
there were more students than there was capacity in Year
Two, the District developed a fair and legally defensible
lottery process, based on that of the Fairbanks School
District. This lottery process was also used with other
optional programs, such as the Montessori Program. In the
lottery, slots were first filled by siblings, so that parents/
families who preferred this program would have first
preference, and not have their children in several different
schools. Some families who had special needs students not
performing well in other Juneau schools, and/or difficult life
circumstances preferred the program over other schools
Over time this meant that several families had two- four
siblings in the program. In winter-spring 2005 a Schoolcommunity task force led by the Assistant Superintendent
proposed a placement process to begin in the 2006-2007
school year, to assure diversity in district-wide optional
programs Ethnicity as preference, key to the selection
process for the TCLL program, was dropped after the first
year, following US Supreme Court case in Seattle School
District lottery. This action put the onus of balancing the
ethnicity of program students, the preferences of Alaska Native
families and the need for a diverse class, in terms of ethnicity,
gender and academic history, on the Harborview Principal. The result was that classroom profiles began to change.
By Year Ten there were more special needs students in the
TCLL classes than in other Harborview classes and indeed
across all the District’s elementary classes in general. It was
also true that the percentage of Alaska Native students in
the TCLL classrooms far exceeded that in other elementary
classes across the District.
At this point in time administrative leadership at the
school and District level is needed to work with families
and the staff to correct this situation, to avoid the over
enrollment of Alaska Native students in special education,
which was the very reason that brought about the civil rights
case in 1999, and which, in some respects, was why this
program was founded.
Recruitment
A main recruitment tool in early years was a Program
Brochure originally drafted in 2001, and distributed at
Native events in Juneau as well as being posted on the
District’s website. It was revised in spring, 2002, 2004,
and again in 2007. Personalized outreach was an effective,
and time consuming recruitment tool, given that the Native
teachers were widely known within the Native community.
At times, such as May of Year Five, they hosted special
Open House to recruit new students. They also visited local
Head Start programs in the early years of the program, to
help parents understand what the program was and what it
was not, and recruit incoming Kindergarteners.
By 2008, as the third grant cycle was ending and TCLL
teachers were worried about future sustainability. At the
same time they were less active in the recruitment process,
reluctant to shoulder the overall task of recruitment. They
determined that if this was truly a district wide program
the District should do the advertising and recruiting of new
students, as they did with other optional programs.
Student Selection
The TCLL program was – and is – a district program,
meaning that any student can apply and if there is space
available, be enrolled in the program. It was never meant to
be a “Native only” program, but rather one that welcomed
any student/family interested in the integration of culture
and language ALONG WITH instruction using the adopted
District curriculum. In Juneau each school principal has the
responsibility to oversee student placement with teachers,
keeping in mind any parental requests, along with the
District mandate to ensure racial, gender and ability balance
across the grades.
Initially it was assumed that Head Start and preschool
18
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
Student Reflections on TCLL program and
education in Juneau
As 5th graders, when asked what they remembered from
being in the program since they were primary children:
Throughout the ten year span students were regularly
asked to reflect on their experience in a TCLL classroom
in surveys, journals and in small group discussions. Staff
used student reflections to alter instructional themes,
diagnose who needed additional support and to make
recommendations to administrators about changes that might
be needed.
The External Evaluator for the TCLL program and
federal grants did individual interviews with the first cohort
group of students on an annual basis from 2005 – 2010,
as they exited elementary school and moved on to middle
school and into high school. The purpose of the interviews
was to gain insights into how they perceived themselves as
students in the larger system and the degree to which they
perceived any impacts from being in the TCLL program for
all or most of their elementary years.
Some of the questions probed during interviews
included:
I’m really proud of my hard work and how my
teachers liked it
I liked how I was Grandpa in the second grade play. It
was so cool
I liked doing spelling tests, learning how to spell words
Learning Tlingit, singing and dancing, drumming,
learning how to draw Tlingit designs
I liked it when we went to Echo Ranch with all 3
classes
We were small – we’re a lot bigger now. We have
learned so much.
As 8th graders, when asked what they are most proud of:
Finished my ROPES project
Got into Early Scholars
Is culture and language important to students?
Good grades 1st semester
What cultural activities resonated with them through the
years, helping define who they are?
Taking care of my grandparent who needed a place to
stay
Is it important that the District continue a program
like the TCLL, focused on Native culture?
Joining a dance group
Paying more attention to school
Doing my homework
Highlighted below are comments from the transitional
years – grades 5, 8 and 9 - as students moved into middle
and high school. This is the time when more Native students
tend to leave school, and where test scores and grades tend
to slump. It is the also grade span when the Juneau District
tended to focus most of its attention – in high school.
In 2012, as the first group was about to graduate there
was one more interview session with each of them and the
Evaluator. Seven of the ten students were contacted and
interviewed.
Looking that what they themselves have to say is
important to not only seeing what program components
made a difference to students, but also present insights
into their lives as Native student living in Juneau. Students
anecdotal reporting show their thoughts about what really
matters in school, what is valued in school – homework,
attendance, staying out of trouble.
Following are select quotes directly from these
interviews, journals and group discussions.
Making a Tlingit paddle
Staying out of trouble
As 8th graders, when asked what their goals were for next
year:
Work my hardest
Do homework on time, turn it in
Go to school, be on time
Play basketball
Miss less school
Get better grades
Stay out of trouble
Passing
Survive
When asked as 9th graders who their best friends were,
67% responded with names of other TCLL students they had
known since elementary school, an indication of the strong
bonds built within the Harborview community.
19
Tens Years Later
As 9th graders, when asked what they remembered the most
about middle school:
As high school students, when asked if they were happy that
they were in the TCLL program they all unanimously said
YES:
A lot of WORK
I like my own history, and learning about interesting
things
I was so sad all of the time.
I never got gym class- applied every year, never got it
I made lots of friends and kept them since then
Tlingit classes
It felt like a family
Weaving
We learned about our culture
Sports
I learned the language…my only time to ever learn it
The projects we did in the Cultural Leadership class
I remember the Koo éex
Kids were trying to act mature. I didn’t act mature - I
was just myself. I was picked on because of that.
I got closer to my family
To me it was my childhood. I learned a lot of important
things
th
As 9 graders, when asked whether high school is what
they thought it would be:
I thought it was gonna be like on TV, with a bunch of
cliques. There ARE, but not like on TV.
What did the TCLL program teach you about being
Tlingit?
In the beginning it didn’t seem that different; now it
is.
I know my introduction, but I feel embarrassed because
I am so white
I thought it would be a lot harder. It’s just a bigger
middle school with more classes.
Respect for Elders and food
It’s a lot easier than I thought it would be.
Helped me with respect, not being disobedient to my
parents
How to make masks
It’s fun, really fun.
I have some friends who are seniors, juniors and
sophomores AND my old friends.
We shouldn’t be ashamed
In high school people don’t judge you so much.
How not to hate another culture or person because of
what they believe in
How to be a leader
Everyone said it was going to be bad – it was not bad
at all. You have to find some way to fit in. I barely
had any friends in middle school. Now I have many,
who are nice.
I was scared about being initiated. But no one
initiated me.
I wish that in middle school I would have learned the
basics of Algebra more. I forgot it over the years.
As high school students, what advice would you give to
Native middle school students?
Be yourself
Keep your friends close
Don’t take out your cell phone in class
Don’t be mean to teachers; they can be mean back
Do your work so you graduate
Pay attention!
Get into Early Scholars- it’s a good college readiness
program, kind of like a family
Don’t be afraid to do what you want to
20
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
What are you looking forward to in life?
Responses included a wide array of dreams and
ambitions:
Travelling, moving to the Philippines, being a cook,
getting a good job, seeing what happens after college, being
a musician, working with my brothers, having a good family
and a home that I don’t have to worry about, learning the
bass guitar, owning a coffee shop, being a Trooper, going
somewhere to college and then coming back to Alaska,
having children, being a better person, getting a private
flying license, being successful in business, doing something
with electronics, growing up and seeing what it is like.
What do you remember from the TCLL Program?
All the little kids in bibs dancing and singing with Ms.
Kitty
During the last interviews with seven of the original
group of TCLL students, one month before they were due to
graduate, 100% of them felt like they had gotten a good
education.
As 10th graders, when asked if they plan to go to college,
about half - 44% - had indicated they were interested in
college, Beauty school or the National Guard. As this group
was about to graduate, only one was fully registered at UAS;
four others talked about going to college “at some point”.
One was still interested in Beauty school.
What are you most proud of?
I AM going to graduate
Doing well in Human Anatomy
Making friends who I am going to keep in my heart
forever
Getting on the baseball team
Gained more knowledge
School helped me become the person I am today
Biggest Challenges in School:
Testing
Being a procrastinator
Homework – don’t like it, didn’t do it until the coaches
made me do it
Taking required courses where I didn’t learn anything
Learning Russian
Junior year
Didn’t learn until the last two years that grades were
important, even if they don’t tell you where you’re
gonna end up or how smart you really are
Figuring out who people were, really
I hated recess; it was boring and uneventful
Ms. Shgen and Ms. Liz – two of the greatest teachers
Teachers and friends
Native artwork we did- making paddles and drums,
salmon prints, painting eagles, ravens
Singing songs, dancing, talking about the weather in
Tlingit
Performing at concerts, public events
Playing BINGO and understanding every word
Should the Juneau School District keep the
TCLL program?
Here is some of what they had this to say about the
Program and their education in the Juneau School District.
21
Why not? You get a strong cultural background and can
decide later if you want to stay involved with the culture
It gives kids a sense of family/community at school if
they don’t already have one
It bonds kids together and they learn from each other
It brings kids closer together and keeps our heritage
going
We were all a family in one community
So kids can learn their culture and language
My brothers are there now.
All my nieces and nephews are there, and they are
learning good stuff
Tens Years Later
PROGRAM LEADERSHIP
As the following chart illustrates, there was a regular turnover of TCLL Program Directors – seven in the ten year period.
Program Directors were- and are- appointed by the Superintendent, sometimes in consultation with Native parents/advisors.
In addition, they had to be approved in writing by the U.S. Department of Education office that awarded the grants. Four of
the seven Directors were Alaska Native administrators.
TCLL Administrators: 2000-2010
Year
HBV Principal
Program
Administrator
Assistant
Superintendent
00-01
Suzie Cary
Drew Alexander
Sasha Sobolef
Peggy Cowan
01-02
02-03
Superintendent
Gary Bader
Peggy Cowan
Bob Dye
03-04
Charla Wright
Bader/Cowan
Bernie Sorenson
Bernie Sorenson
04-05
05-06
06-07
07-08
08-09
09-10
Kathy Yanamura
Rhonda Hickok
Linda Frame
Charla Wright
Dave Stoltenberg
Alberta Jones
Barbara Cadiente Nelson
Peggy Cowan
Laury Scandling
Glen Gelbrich
Administrative oversight of the program was- and is- one
of many responsibilities of these District leaders – none
of them were paid 100% by a grant, with 100% attention
dedicated to grant implementation/operations. On both sides
– staff and administration – the program was perceived as
“intense”, in terms of human relations and student/program
needs. Some administrators preferred programs/projects
with less regular contact on every level. There were some
administrators who wanted to reduce the sense of being
overwhelmed by the personalities of program staff who were
fierce and highly verbal advocates for students and families.
Several reported the common administrative frustration of
not having enough time to do the job right, to pay enough
attention, to be present in each classroom on a regular basis,
to know all the parents. Overall, there was little satisfaction
in being in charge of the TCLL program.
From the staff perspective over the years, when
asked what would improve the program, most of them
cited administration. “XXX makes seemingly capricious
decisions, decisions without knowing, and then tends to
change her/his mind afterward.”
“Never keeps notes, doesn’t come to meetings regularly,
doesn’t return emails, or respond to any of us.” “This is a
sinking ship, going down fast.”
Though other program staff felt supported by either/
or both district and school administrators, this was a less
22
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
In order to empower parents to take more ownership
of the program in Year Four administrators invited one
parent to co-chair the PAC, help to set agenda items,
facilitate meetings and act as a public voice for program
with parents. This effort did not happen beyond that school
year, when the administrators changed. In 2004 parents
who attended meetings talked about drafting by-laws for
the PAC, which would institutionalize their function and
role as advisors. This never really happened. To address the
lack of involvement on the part of some parents, in 2004
administrators and a small group of parents created a pledge
for parent involvement, to hand out at start of the next
school year. It occurred, but only the one time, and was not
referred to after getting the signatures on the pledges.
Early in program there was an effort to get “room
parents” who would contact others about activities and
needs; this idea did not work. The group also tried to get
each room to organize one Family Night for the year, to
share the responsibility of those logistics and get more
parents involved. That did not work either.
On surveys and in informal interviews it appeared that
a number of parents did not understand what they were
supposed to do for the program beyond attend parent teacher
conferences and Family Nights, or help on field trips when
asked. They did not get a strong sense about how they
were to be involved as “advisors” or advocates for this
program within a school, which was different than any other
experiences with a Juneau school in terms of expectations
for parents. Attachment 1 lists the dates and attendance at
41 Advisory Board meetings that occurred over the ten year
period.
prevalent feeling. “XXX responds right away via email when
I write, ask questions.” ‘The principal is trying…wants to
do the right thing. At least asks us questions about what is
going on.”
The turnover of administrators was a key factor in the
ups and downs of the TCLL program. In the minds of
program staff, when they were feeling resilient, the relative
lack of leadership left them to be creative, to make decisions
based on their emerging sense of what made a difference
with student attendance, attitude and academic performance,
and parent relations. Had there been more direct and regular
administrative leadership the program staff might not have
done what they did; they took risks and tried new things.
When staff was feeling less resilient and overwhelmed, the
lack of administrative leadership and consistent support was
a serious issue with them.
In addition to district and school administrators there
were part time Administrative Assistants funded by the
federal grants, working under the direction of the Program
Director. Job duties included help with program logistics
and finances. There was little if any regular interaction
between program staff and this Assistant. At times staff was
frustrated by a perceived lack of timely response to their
requests from the Assistant and inconsistent expectations
as Directors changed (eg. Some Administrative Assistants
shopped for Family Night supplies, others did not so that
program staff had to do this; some Assistants were efficient
in processing supplies requests or MOAs, others took more
time and did not communicate status of orders/contracts,
according to staff interviews)
TCLL Advisory Board/PAC
Juneau Board of Education
From the start grant objectives included the presence of
an Advisory Board, to guide program development from
the Native community perspective. At times this group was
limited to parents only; it was known as the PAC (Parent
Advisory Committee). In the second grant the group was
expanded to include “Native stakeholders”, representatives
of local, tribal organizations. In both cases the Advisory
Board was convened by the TCLL District Administrator.
Given the turnover with this administrative position, it is no
surprise to say that there were periods of relative inactivity
with the Advisory Board. When a grant was about to expire
there tended to be more activity, more meetings.
Recurring themes from reviews of the Advisory Board
agendas included such things as how to get more parent
participation in classroom activities and the program in
general, planning for 5th grade promotions, transitions
to middle school, supplies needed by program staff,
Family Gathering topics, grant reviews and sustainability
challenges, communications with parents, student
recruitment and district wide expansion, (as far back as 2003
parents discussed how to replicate the program in a school
in the Valley)
“ Without your support this would never have
happened. Continued efforts for these endeavors
require the continued support of the School Board
as well as our people.” (Parent, 2003)
For many years in the 1990s -2000s the District
had a district strategy focused specifically on NATIVE
STUDENT SUCCESS, and an Action Team to implement
suggested actions, known commonly at that time as the
“Strategy II Team”. In January 2002 that team met as a
follow up to an Alaska Native Education Summit held in
Anchorage, during which District representatives and local
leaders discussed: 23
•
What are the perceptions of how Native students
are doing in the JSD?
•
Are Juneau schools welcoming to parents and
reflect the diversity of its student population?
•
What does quality education look like for Native
students?
Tens Years Later
•
They remarked on “driving principles” such as language
preservation, sensitivity, respect and concern about
cultures.” And posed the question ”Is there a consensus
among key stakeholders that there is a clear goal for what
the programs should look like?” One of the enduring
challenges – for the TCLL program along with other
programs and services – has been the lack of a sustainable,
clear vision for Native student success within the District,
shared by the community at large.
What barriers and issues impact Native student
success?
By the end of the meeting the team recommended that
the School Board and District continue Strategy #2, with
actions such as “ being more visible and public in support
of Native people and indigenous ways of knowing; follow
the cultural standards; get parents into schools; hire a
Native parent liaison; sponsor new teacher orientation
about cultural issues; get language into schools by use of
Type M certificated people.” Some of these actions were
subsequently incorporated into the objectives of federal
grant proposals made on behalf of Native students. The
TCLL program was viewed as one venue where some of the
action could or should occur.
On February 20, 2001, 23 parents and some children
attended their first school board meeting to give their
opinions of the program. It was the first full and detailed
report on the program since the Juneau Board of Education
had approved it initially in fall, 1999. The testimony from
parents both Native and non-Native was overwhelmingly
positive and appreciative.
In the years following that heartfelt parent testimony
the Juneau Board of Education, which included one Native
board member, requested reports on the TCLL program
and progress toward grant goals on an intermittent basis.
Reporting was typically done as part of curriculum
and instruction reporting or federal grant updates. Six
presentations* specifically about the program were made
by the District Administrator in charge. One or more school
board members periodically visited the program in person to
observe and learn more about what students were learning.
In 2006 a district wide Equity Committee was
established as an outgrowth of the 2005 lottery task force,
and included school board members. After training and
consultation with a national expert, in 2008 - 9 an Equity
Matrix was drafted by the committee and reviewed
by administrators past and present, in the hopes of
implementing some systemic changes within the District.
In spring of Year Ten -2010- the District-wide equity
committee completed drafts of a proposed equity policy
and regulations. The Board then adopted an Equity Policy
(#1265) in November.
(During the 2010 – 11 school year the Program
Evaluation Committee of the District focused on a yearlong
review of supports for Native students, conditions for Native
student success and cultural programming. This review
included and overview of the TCLL program.
Almost ten years after the 2002 questions raised by
the Board of Education and District leadership similar
questions surfaced at a Board work session in late 2010.
Members discussed structures within the district relating
to Native student success, talking about the “Harborview
(school within a school) model” and the Gastineau (all
school implementation) model”, among other things.
24
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
TCLL CURRICULUM
Teacher Resources necessary to implement the unit
directly follow the lessons. Writers were adamant that
Resources be contained in the Units, to save teachers time
and effort. Resources include such things as hands-on
directions for making objects and photos of what the objects
look like, Tlingit vocabulary cards, templates for masks and
books to be assembled and realistic photos of places and
traditional artifacts taken with permission from the State
Archives.
The frequency of hits to the Sealaska website indicates
that TCLL units serve as a curriculum resource to many
teachers outside the Juneau School District, teachers
anywhere in the world.
Standards based, Place based, Culture based Units
Process of Creation, Evolution of a Lesson/Unit
Template
In Year One the TCLL program team drafted a four
year rotational cycle of curriculum units that were tied to
seasonal and subsistence activities. The cycle was designed
to repeat every two years because classes would be two year,
multi-graded groupings. (eg. Bears is a K-1 unit done every
other year in the fall, along with Berries) The sequence
of seasonal themes are appropriate to Tlingit lifestyle and
culture. The chart designating yearly cycles and a four year
rotation of curriculum themes was aligned with the Juneau
science and social studies CORE curricula and district
expectations.
After the
traditional
Tribal
Values were
unanimously
adopted
by Central
Council Tribal
Delegate
Assembly in
2005, they
were added
to subsequent
units.
All
thematic
units, which
were mostly
designed for
students in
grades K – 3,
were printed
and contained
in 3 ring
binders, one for each Juneau school library where they are
catalogued for check out. The Tlingit words and phrases in
each unit were recorded by SHI contracted Elders Johnny
Marks and June Pegues, assisted by Yarrow Varaa. Other
Elders including Nora Dauenhauer and Selena Everson also
contributed to the translations as curriculum writers worked
on drafts. CDs of the language are included within each
unit’s notebook.
From the start TCLL staff were keen on building
sustainable curriculum lessons and units infused with
culture and references to the place where they live. In the
first few years, and then intermittently over later years
staff were paid to draft curriculum in the summer, to have
it ready for school year implementation. They tended to
work individually, and occasionally shared drafts or asked
colleagues for help As the schedule for production of units
gradually slowed, TCLL Literacy Leader Kathy Nielson was
assigned to draft and produce curriculum materials in Year
Four, resulting in additional units. Evaluator Annie Calkins
served as editor for all units that were published, using a
back and forth editing process with the teacher/writer. This
method spurred further thinking about the topic of each unit
and ensured some consistency in breadth, depth and voice
within and among the units.
The template for all curriculum units was devised in
Year Two, after long discussions about “how much is too
much?” There was consensus about the need for a format
that would be easy for teachers to follow. Each unit contains
the following elements
Cultural Significance
Role of Elders
Unit Overview
Alaska State Standards directly addressed in the unit
Following this is a series of Lessons, which present the
following, in this order:
Objective(s)
Suggested Time
Materials
Vocabulary Words, in both English and Tlingit
Tlingit Phrases used in the unit
Activities, with step-by-step directions to the teacher
Assessment(s)
Additional Resources
Optional Extension Activities
25
Tens Years Later
PRIMARY THEMATIC UNITS
INTERMEDIATE THEMATIC UNITS
The units were – and continue to be – used frequently
in the two primary classrooms. As the program expanded
to grades 4-5, the issue of culture based, place based units
became problematic when the District hired new teachers
who were not steeped in traditional cultural practices and
who felt the pressures of teaching basic skills – reading,
writing, math – so that students would perform well on
standardized tests. The result was that by Year Ten the
cultural focus of the program was gradually eroded, and
the 4-5 staff member felt relatively disassociated from
her colleagues in terms of daily curriculum content and
resources.
Most of the first 18 units were sent to other Southeast
districts and to the State Library. TCLL classes at
Harborview each have their own set of units, appropriate
to the grade level, and Gastineau School has an extra set of
the series. Any teacher interested in obtaining her/his own
copy can download both the units and the Teacher Resources
from the district or SHI websites. By 2011 there were 27
thematic units developed in the TCLL program.
In Year Ten the Goldbelt Heritage Foundation (GHF)
began development of additional curriculum resources with
a strong emphasis on teaching the language that can now be
found on their website, GoldbeltHeritage.org.
TCLL program staff conducted a number of training
sessions for Juneau teachers and others over the ten year
period, in an effort to familiarize them with the resources at
hand and motivate them to use units themselves.
Some of the long term TCLL program staff expressed
the need and interest in finding out how other teachers use
the units, what they find most useful about the units, if they
want them solely as online resources, etc. Teachers also
urged the District or GHF begin a process of organized
review and modification of the many units.
In addition to the published units staff “ created cultural
lessons week by week” given the paucity of any existent
resources or availability of resources in the school. ABC
charts in English and Tlingit and other visuals were
developed, produced, and widely shared across the District.
Teachers and Assistants continually worked after school to
develop their own lessons and materials. Some were shared;
most were owned and used only by their creators.
The necessity of curriculum development by program
staff contributed to the sense of intensity about “being in the
program”, compared to being a “regular classroom teacher”,
particularly for those teachers unfamiliar with creating
meaningful curriculum.
Berries
Canoes
Salmon
Glaciers
Spruce Trees
Weaving and Geometry
Beach
Earth and Rocks
Water
Southeast Alaska
Land Mammals
Salmon and Fishing
Alder and Cottonwood
Elizabeth Peratrovich
Hemlock Trees
Rocks on Our Land
Who Am I?
Herring
Hooligan
Plants
Sea Mammals
Totem Poles
Red and Yellow Cedar
The Girl Who Lived with the Bears
Salmon Boy
How Raven Stole the Sun
Tale of an Alaska Whale
Grade Level: Kindergarten
Tlingit Cultural Significance
A series of elementary level thematic units
featuring Tlingit language, culture and history
were developed in Juneau, Alaska in 2004-6.
The project was funded by two grants from
the U.S. Department of Education, awarded
to the Sealaska Heritage Institute (Boosting
Academic Achievement: Tlingit Language
Immersion Program, grant #92-0081844)
and the Juneau School District (Building on
Excellence, grant #S356AD30001).
Lessons and units were written by a team
of teachers and specialists led by Nancy
Douglas, Elementary Cultural Curriculum
Coordinator, Juneau School District. The
team included Juneau teachers Kitty Eddy,
Shgen George, Kathy Nielson, Hans Chester
and Rocky Eddy, and SHI language team
members Linda Belarde, Yarrow Vaara, David
Katzeek, John Marks, Mary Foletti, Rose
Natkong and Jessica Chester. Curriculum
consultants Julie Folta and Toni Mallott
assisted and Annie Calkins edited the
lessons and units.
Lessons were field tested in Juneau
classrooms in 2005-6.
All units are available online at
sealaskaheritage.org.
Tlingit children are traditionally taught their lineage through oral history. They
learn their family history, what village they are from, what clan they are a member
of, what moiety they belong to, and the crests they are entitled to use because
of that membership. Through oral history they learn their Tlingit name, where it
came from and what it means. Knowing who you are and where you come from is
absolutely essential today even as it was generations ago.
Elder/Culture Bearer Role
Along with family members, Elders/Culture Bearers may:
• Assist and encourage students to participate in sharing/gathering their family
history throughout this unit.
• Tell clan histories, and explain protocols related to clan identity.
• Teach simple kinship names and terms of endearment.
• Teach the correct pronunciation of the Lingít vocabulary and phrases used.
Overview
When students begin to understand who they are and things about themselves
they have a better sense of how they fit into their family and community. Knowing
that, they can better learn to appreciate other cultures that may be different than
their own and learn about the larger world in which we all live.
In this unit each student will create “A Book About Me.” Having students work
on the booklet one page at a time will help deepen understanding and make
classroom management easier. A final product will be assembled at the end of
the experience, enabling children to again reflect on what they have learned about
themselves.
*Remember to be sensitive to both non-Tlingit and non-Native students. They will
feel more included in this culturally based unit by using the information they know
and learn about their particular background and heritage, following the model of a
Tlingit cultural perspective. Allow students who do not have Tlingit names to pick
a play name, being sure to check it’s appropriateness with local Elders.
The contents of this curriculum were developed under the Tlingit Language Immersion Program (2004) and
Building on Excellence (2005) grants from the U.S. Department of Education. However, the contents do not necessarily
represent the policy of the Dept. of Education and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government
Twenty seven elementary units were uploaded onto
the Sealaska Heritage Institute website, http://www.
sealaskaheritage.org/programs/language_and_culture_
curriculum_Tlingit.htm
From initial posting on the website in June, 2007, in
the first nine months there were 3,130 visits to the SHI
curriculum page.
Between April, 2008 – April 2009 there were 3,717 visits
Between April, 2009 – April, 2010 there were 2,920 visits
The Beach, Hemlock, Alder, Elizabeth Peratrovich and
Sea Mammals units appear to be most popular, with each
having over 500 hits during a one year cycle. The overall
average was 452 hits/unit over the ten year period.
In addition to these elementary units, SHI also produced
standards based secondary units on such things as the Alaska
Native Claims Settlement Act, Geometry, Physical Science
and Earth Science.
26
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
TLINGIT LANGUAGE
3 semester series of Tlingit classes, focused on “learning
about the language so that participants would gain a greater
awareness and appreciation of the structure of the Tlingit
language”.
“Our Culture Lives in Our Language”
2002
Evolution of Language Integration within TCLL
Program
SHI obtained a $446,000 federal grant to offer 10-day
summer language immersion camps in 2002-4, with the
goal of “increasing Tlingit language fluency in students
and training aspiring Native language teachers to operate
immersion programs.”
The history of how Tlingit language evolved within the
TCLL program and beyond, into other grades and schools
deserves notice. The commitment and effort to teach the
language was consistent; marshalling the people, the
resources and the funding to do so was more challenging.
From the beginning language instruction was dependent
upon who was available, who was interested, who was fluent
and who had any experience working with young children.
Though Richard Dauenhauer loudly urged the development
of a written scope and sequence to guide language
instruction it took years to complete that effort. Finding
talented certified or Type M certified teachers also took
years. A glance at the timeline of events below illustrates the
effort it takes to work within the complex system of a large
school district.
Hans Chester taught a new Tlingit language class at JDHS
for 30 Earl Scholars students
Rosita Worl and David Katzeek taught a course on Tlingit
culture and language to 35 PITAAS students at UAS
Dick Dauenhauer offered 1 credit course “Teachers Teaching
Tlingit Unit Design”. Five JSD teachers enrolled; three
completed lessons/units
A seminar and workshop produced the earliest draft of
Sneaky Sounds, which was revised in subsequent sessions,
and published by Sealaska Heritage Institute in 2006
1998
Juneau Board of Education unanimously approved
allocation of $30,000 for FY 99 and FY 00 for “the purpose
of supporting Tlingit language instruction and integration
of cultural curriculum in JSD. Following that action,
Superintendent Mary Rubadeau asked Juneau Native
Education Commission for advice. They suggested an
Advisory Committee including Ronalda Cadiente Brown,
Phyllis Carlson, Andy Hope and Leonard James to guide the
District.
Initial discussions with TCLL staff about assessing Tlingit
as words and phrases are taught by Elders; pre and post
testing modeled after other districts was implemented by
Nancy Douglas
2003
Laury Scandling, Assistant Principal at JDHS recruited part
time Tlingit language teacher for JDHS to offer one class,
generate interest
“Teachers Teaching Tlingit” project was initiated, under the
direction of Richard and Nora Dauenhauer. Juneau teachers
applied, were selected and received stipends to create
materials for classroom use that would introduce students
to Tlingit language. Eight JSD staff members participated
and produced materials such as a “Salmon Boy” shadow
puppet play, Tlingit basketry and geometry project and the
beginning of “ sneaky sounds” lists of Tlingit sounds
2006
TCLL Grant #3 includes Objective “Develop Tlingit
language curriculum, related assessments and materials to
implement Tlingit language instruction along with a series
of Tlingit cultural activities”
Language team formed to produce curriculum, based on
language goals for Beginning language learners. Begins two
year effort of creation.
1999 – 2001
SHI offered two week Kusteeyi Institutes for over 85
participants teaching Tlingit and Haida language along with
courses in Native language teaching methods and cultural
arts
2008
There were 594 students taking language courses at
JDHS, Yaa Koos, Dzantiki Heeni and Harborview, taught
by Jessica Chester, Florence Sheakley, Lyle James, Mary
Foletti (students actually received 6-15 hours of language/
year)
2001
Richard Dauenhauer, Nora Dauenhauer and Jeff Leer, (he
was in residency at UAS for one year from UAF), taught a
27
Tens Years Later
Tlingit Language Proficiency Scope and Sequence, Levels
1 – 4 produced by team from JSD, SHI, and UAS
appropriate. Chester was supervised by the Harborview
principal using the same evaluation process used with the
rest of the TCLL staff.
Advice, consultation and coaching in second language
acquisition methodology was offered to Chester by
UAS language faculty including Dr. Alice Taff, Dr. Dick
Dauenhauer, and Nora Dauenhauer.
2009
Goldbelt Heritage Foundation funds full time language
and culture position at Harborview; students receive
daily language instruction. TCLL Grant #3 funds ull time
language and culture position at Gastineau; most students
in school receive frequent, though not daily instruction in
Tlingit
Tlingit Teachers in the TCLL program
Year One:
Florence Sheakley
Year Two:
Robert Milton
Year Three:
Robert Milton (part time)
Year Four:
Hans Chester, intermittently
Year Five:Mary Folletti, Yarrow Vaara (SHI), Selena Everson, Paul Jackson
(5 hours/week)
Year Six:Yarrow Vaara (SHI), Selena Everson, various Elders
Year Seven:
Selena Everson
Year Eight:Jessica Chester (part time; shared with JDHS)
Year Nine:
Jessica Chester (part time),
Selena Everson
Year Ten:Jessica Chester, Selena Everson
Two teachers field test Tlingit Scope and Sequence, Year
One, and assessments
2010
Harborview TCLL students receive 53 hours of Tlingit
instruction throughout the year. Gastineau students in 13
classrooms receive 15 - 30 minutes, once or twice a week.
“Lots of people don’t know how language
is being lost and how it all started. It was
taken away from us. I think it’s REALLY
important that people should know how this
happened. There is a big void in the life of
many people younger than me and I am 72.
They have no background. They don’t know
who they are.”
Tlingit Scope and Sequence
Tlingit Instruction
“We have been meeting every Tuesday morning to create
a usable Tlingit language Scope and Sequence. This has
been a difficult but most interesting task. This will be a
one-of-a-kind curriculum to be used by Tlingit language
instructors throughout Southeast.” —Teacher Comment
In the Harborview TCLL program, Tlingit language was
typically taught in 20 – 30 minute sessions. In the first few
years, visiting Elders were language instructors because
there were no Tlingit speakers among the district’s staff.
Student learning of the language was sporadic, as health
issues, contract issues and other employment demands on
the Elders interfered with consistent delivery of instruction.
Up until Year Eight, it was typically taught one day/week.
In Year Two, TCLL teachers identified specific words
and phrases within the two year curriculum cycle themes, to
be taught by whoever was available to teach Tlingit. These
words and phrases aligned with topics of curriculum units
(mostly under development) or with what was typically
taught in the primary grades – things like Body Parts,
Numbers, Colors, Animals, Family Members, Commands,
Names of Months, Food, Seasons, Money and Regalia
Terms.
By Year Eight, grant funding finally allowed for a
dedicated, trained language teacher, enabling more frequent,
consistent Tlingit classes. Jessica Chester was hired and
proceeded to build the TCLL language program and
accompanying materials (ie. picture cards, games) from
scratch. She worked side by side with teachers as they taught
thematic units, integrating words and phrases in Tlingit as
An October, 2006 meeting, initiated by Program
staff as a result of the new grant objective dealing with
language, brought together all local stakeholders in language
preservation to identify goals and outcomes across agencies.
Rolling up sleeves, committing themselves to two years of
weekly meetings resulted in a monumental accomplishment
– the development of a sequential scope and sequence
for language instruction to guide what students were
learning. Elders consulted throughout the process, helping
with editing and pronunciation. The purpose of the final
document was to include all features of the grammar with
explanations, showing the relationships among them, so that
teachers and learners would be able to learn all aspects of
Tlingit. The team produced a set of cultural content topics
with salient phrases and vocabulary for each topic. The team
had 40 topics under production.
28
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
Level 1: Self, Food/Beverage, Animals, Classroom/
numbers 1-10, Naming culturally relevant items,
plants
Using the 4 -5 class as an example, the Final Test with
162 words on the list revealed that 15 out of 17 students
(88%) met the goal:
Level 2: add Seasons, Weather, Location, Clothing,
Family
• 2 students got all words correct on 9 of the 14 sub tests.
Level 3: add Geography, Community, Home, Health,
Transportation
• 1 student got 154 out of 162 correct =A
• 7 students got at least 140 out of 162 correct =B
• 5 students got at least 125 out of 162 correct =C
Level 4: add Modern and Traditional Technology
(techniques and manufacturing), Trading and
Money, Stories, Recreational Activities
From what we learned, it is estimated that primary
students learned about 59 - 79 words and “sentence frames/
dialogues” in one year; students in upper grades learned at
least 144 words and sentence frames/dialogues, as indicated
on tests. The class examples show that the goal of 100 Level
One words/year is totally attainable and that some students
could be challenged beyond the 100 words, or grouped with
others who are older and more fluent with the language.
The results of this language assessment pilot provided
the District, SHI, and other stakeholders with an important,
valuable lesson – what is perceived as a very difficult
language can be learned by young children, as it was for
hundreds of years.
Instructors -Jessica Chester (HBV) and Mary Folletti
(GAST) used TPR (Total Physical Response) and Stephen
Greymorning’s techniques for language learning.
In the last two years of the grant at Harborview, K-5
students received 30 minutes/day or roughly 53 hours
of Tlingit language instruction/year. One or more Elders
actively participated in language instruction, supplying
additional words and phrases, and helping children with
pronunciation.
“We are learning more words to describe
things like animals, trees, weather, colors
and numbers. The students are interacting
with this language and putting Tlingit labels
on some of their art projects.”
” I encounter children on the playground,
hallways and restrooms who are using
Tlingit words with each other.”
“Learners are doing great! Most know most
test items!”
“Learners know best the words that are
included in songs. Kids I thought weren’t
paying attention knew the most.”
Over the years, the Juneau School District attempted to
respond to pressure from the Native community to provide
Tlingit language in schools, by offering a Tlingit class at
Juneau Douglas High School and quarterly Exploratory
classes at Dzantik’i Heeni. This remains an inconsistent
commitment, due to lack of qualified staff and intermittent
student interest.
At the end of Year Ten, all TCLL students were
tested using a list of 171 words from Level One of the
Scope and Sequence. Words were grouped into units like
Weather, Food and Classroom Commands; there was a total
of 16 units/topics tested. The assessment process was useful
as instructors were able to “pinpoint items that need more
reinforcement.” They then prepared additional materials to
teach what needed reinforcement, and in some cases, added
more time for individualized direct instruction.
FAMILY TLINGIT
From the start there was a concentrated effort in the
TCLL program to interest families in learning the language.
With a family approach children learning Tlingit could
share what they had learned in school at home. Parents
and grandparents could join in supporting their children’s
learning and begin to re-learn the language that had been
lost to them, largely due to punitive Western schooling.
Elders would see that the language was alive and being
preserved.
A series of workshops, presentations and short term
classes, listed below, were designed and offered, to see
what “would stick” and gain the commitment of families to
participate regularly.
GOAL = 100 words /year mastered
Using the 2-3 class as an example, this Final Test
revealed that 18 out of 21 students (86%) met the goal.
• 4 students got all words correct on at least 10 of the 16
testing sessions.
• 3 students got 160 out of 171 correct. (94%) traditional terms and percentages)
= A (in
• 5 students got at least 146 out of 171 correct (85%)= B
• students got at least 133 out of 171 correct (78%)= C
29
Tens Years Later
2002- 3
2006
July – Hans Chester offered free language classes at the
Goldbelt Hotel on Saturday afternoons
Introduction to Tlingit Language one hour evening classes
were offered at Harborview for one month. Five JSD
teachers participated alongside several parents
2003
November - All TCLL K-4 parents were surveyed about
their interest in learning Tlingit, as adults and as families.
21of 26 respondents said they wanted to learn language as
families, one evening/week
2006-7
A Tlingit Scope and Sequence group, including SHI, UAS
and TCLL staff met 15 times from November to mid March
to draft initial grammar and cultural content documents,
which would be linked electronically
2004
January – April A series of four Family Tlingit classes were
offered by one program staff member. Twenty parents and
children attended
Grant funding for the TCLL program over ten years must
be credited for the growing resurgence of interest in learning
Tlingit – a huge legacy of this federal funding. There is
now an unprecedented interest among K – 12 students
from various schools, there are three certified teachers
working in the District who can speak the language, who
can offer language instruction. There is a tested Scope and
Sequence that can be used with people of any age interested
in learning Tlingit. There are solid thematic cultural units
built with the advice of Elders that any teacher can use. A
strong partnership with the University of Alaska Southeast
was nurtured over the decade, which helped bolster a
commitment from the University to regularly offer upper
division courses that lead to a Tlingit minor. If the Juneau
District is to offer language in the schools and with families,
there must be people qualified to teach the language.
Ten years ago, when Sealaska Heritage Institute leaders
and Elders dreamt of implementing a bilingual immersion
program in Juneau; that dream was not yet possible. Today,
this dream could become a reality, given what has happened
in the last decade.
2004
Two Family Song, Stories and Language Nights were hosted
by TCLL (September 21, November 16). Twelve parents
and children attended session #1, eight attended session #2
September 21 – November 30 - Cultural Resource
Specialists offered a series of six 1 1/2 hour Family Song
and Story Nights, to “practice Tlingit language related to
traditional songs and stories.” An average of 5 parents, 5
students and one staff member attended
2005
January – February - SHI Tlingit language specialist offered
one month of weekly two hour sessions for parents and
families. An average of 11 parents and students attended
these sessions, along with one or two staff members
SHI language specialist offered a series of 8 ninety minute
Tlingit Language Nights at Harborview during the winterspring. Attendance was relatively low, typically with 1 – 3
parents and their children in attendance.
30
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND
CAPACITY BUILDING
TCLL Staff Training
In order to build the capacity of TCLL
staff and other teachers, on-going training was
a significant, though not always well planned
feature of the program. TCLL staff tended to
generate requests for training that aligned with
grant goals and objectives. Training occurred
on site, at state and national conferences, in
summer institutes, through individualized
mentoring and via credit courses. What was
learned at conferences or workshops was often
shared with TCLL colleagues at team meetings,
and generally strengthened the skills of program
staff.
Training for District Staff
“If strategies have proven to be successful with
Native students let’s try to get those strategies
into the heads of all JSD teachers. Let’s get
training for all teachers. As a Native parent I want
my children to be taught in a culturally responsive,
respectful classroom by a culturally responsive,
respectful teacher.”
ediate
Interm
s
Grade
usands
many tho
A
glaciers for
cance
ars ago.
l Signifi have lived among acier Bay 9,800 ye on in a
ra
git Cultu
ska
in Gl
locati
ts
Tlin
east Ala
people
another
matic uni
1994,
it of South gical site places
ry level the e, history, and
ars, while
years. In
elementa
The Tling
tur
olo
9,000 ye
at 9,980
e find,
A series of git language, cul git people call
An arche
orded at
on dated
ver, a rar
Tlin
t Tlin
of years. ndhog Bay is rec
featuring
been carb nks of Thorne Ri cts such as
ments tha eau, Alaska in
s
iron
ha
d
ou
env
an
ifa
eral
the local
ped in Jun
site at Gr
on the ba
Wales Isl
ganic art
re develo t was funded by sev
Prince of basket was found ds to destroy or
home we
cave on
The projec U. S. Department t
2004 – 8.
the
ruce root
Alaska ten
hool Distric
arded by
a 5,000 sp soil of Southeast
grants aw to the Juneau Sc 356AD30001
own
c
#S
idi
tion
nt
ac
uca
gra
what is kn rly
of Ed
nce
as the
nt
ated into
on Excelle
e ea
ellence, gra Heritage
(Building
ople migr
de. Thes
ing on Exc
baskets.
alaska
the first pe nces can be ma noes to hunt
ent:
and Expand0056) and the Se
re when
Achievem
ere
ca
su
t
inf
or
t
no
bu
ats
#S356AD6 osting Academic gram grant (#92
gists are
skin bo
y were,
shore for
Institute (Bo ge Immersion Pro
wood or
Archaeolo erica, or who the
y fished off supportgua
who used
Am
nd
ckles; the
Tlingit Lan
as North
tal culture
4).
ms and co als have been fou
– 008184
re a coas
le ate cla
im
eau
people we shore. The peop bones of land an
ted in Jun
tes
d
fiel
were
A few
d.
.
an
d fish off
Lessons .
on
inl
an
lm
d
e
o hunte
d and sa
By the tim
terials
classrooms
ource ma
halibut, co that the people als
al ways.
teacher res
a
in tradition luded stone tool
units and m of teachers and ty
ing the ide
inc
ols made
pLessons,
to
co
Kit
tea
ich
a
d
rs
ne
wh
by
an
che
sto
n
tea
ols
cky
were writtenincluding Juneau
used iro
also used had elaborate to
s
Nielson, Ro
They also
it
nt people
nts were
e, Kathy
specialist
ula
The ancie contact, the Tling and spear points.
impleme
gen Georg Elissa Borges, Pa
Eddy, Sh
s
a. Other
an
Lingít
vikko,
A
ow
pe
.
are
Sa
r
ro
arr
son
ula
ve
Eu
rs,
mp
of
ke
er Ri
r Tho
Eddy, Pa
s, net sin
the Copp bark.
and Jennife nslators, reviewers
Savikko,
kits, blade ably came from
an
and
a Chester,
team of tra
prob
y is that
language ers included Jessic vid Katzeek,
tler, wood
per that
Da
One theor discov, bone, an
and record Linda Belarde, Pegues and
le were.
from shell
ra,
e
de
Var
Jun
,
ma
early peop the remains of the ermarrow
al
rks
Yar
, John Ma ncy Douglas, Cultur der.
who the
d
int
etti
in
le
hin
Fol
rta
op
be
ry
ce
g
lea
pe
Ma
m
not
p of
hauer. Na
n the tea
area leavin
gists are
this grou
Nora Dauen ecialist was ofte ta and Toni
Tlingit.
Archaeolo passed through the g later. Or, that
Sp
Fol
stors of the
Resource consultants Julie lkins edited all
p
m
ngits arrivin ople are the ance
early grou
Annie Ca
Curriculu
th the Tli
pe
isted, and
d sites, wi ngits, or that the
Mallott ass units.
ere
the Tli
lessons and
Savikko
ried with
it: Paula
of this un
Creator
04) and arily
le online at
gram (20
ess
ilab
ava
ersion Protents do not necnment
All units are age.org.
con
ver
guage Imm
erit
Tlingit Lan
wever, theby the Federal Go
sealaskah
under the
cation. Ho
ent
eloped
of Edu
orsem
were dev . Department not assume end
U.S
uld
curriculum
ts of this 05) grants from theion and you sho
The conten
nce (20
of Educat
on Excelle icy of the Dept.
Building
pol
the
represent
Over the ten years TCLL staff tried a variety of
venues to share their classroom environments and
approaches to teaching, and the cultural units/materials
that had been developed with district colleagues. (See
Attachment 3 for listing of District Staff trainings) For
example, grant funds were allocated to enable district
teachers to visit TCLL classrooms in half day sessions,
and program overview presentations for other interested
schools were offered to all elementary principals. Only
a few teachers accepted the offer to visit; no principal
visited the program for any length of time. The main
vehicle for learning about the TCLL curriculum, emerging
effective practices for teaching Native students or ideas
for better engaging Native parents were informal, collegial
conversations or periodic, formal in-service presentations.
31
Tens Years Later
PARENTS AND COMMUNITY
Increasing parent involvement and engagement in
education was a consistent goal in all three federal grants.
One grant goal was to actually increase parent involvement
by 10%/year, as demonstrated by participation in parent
teacher conferences, Family Nights, special events in
classrooms/school, Parent Advisory Committee meetings
and by returns of surveys and forms. The program
evaluation included a matrix of parent attendance at various
events, which was often discussed among program staff.
Everyone understood the importance and the challenge
of increasing parent engagements. One administrator mid
decade summed up a common held belief: ”If we made
schools more welcoming and engaging for Native families
they would then support their kids and get them to school
on time and get them to do their homework -two important
ways to increase student achievement. And it takes years to
build that environment.”
Communicating with Native parents was a recurring
challenge and intermittent complaint from Juneau teachers
for years, for a variety of reasons. Knowing this, the
TCLL staff, themselves Native, consistently made parent
connections a priority.
Starting in the first week of school in Year One TCLL
staff sent home weekly Parent newsletters highlighting
children engaged in classroom activities. This continued to
be the practice in the primary room throughout the decade,
and was emulated by the 2/3 grade teachers as well. Parent
newsletters to 4/5 grade students were not as frequent on a
regular basis.
At various times, special parent newsletters about the
program in general across the three classrooms were sent
home with students in an attempt to convey the fact that
TCLL was a program, not just three classrooms.
In Year Four when there were three Cultural Specialists/
Instructional Assistants in the program, a new strategy
was tried - phone calls to parents from the Specialists, to
communicate about upcoming events and student success
during the day/week.
Program parents asked at different times about getting
each other’s numbers to activate a phone tree for themselves,
so that they could take some of the responsibility for parent
connections away from the staff. The District responded
that due to privacy rules they were not able to share
numbers, to the frustration of the parents initiating this
action. After this, there were no further efforts by parents to
take on inter-classroom communications.
By Year Seven, as the demographic profile of students
was changing from what it had been in the early years,
communications, even within a program with Native
teachers who were familiar with the parents became a
frustration for those teachers. “Less than half my parents
have emails and the kids don’t give parents the papers
in their backpacks.” “Keeping up communications with
parents is my greatest challenge.” During interviews
Tribal Leadership Support
The TCLL program, particularly the Harborview
Program, had the attention of the Native community and
tribal leaders since its inception. Parents shared descriptions
of the program’s impact on their children. Tribal newsletters
heralded the founding and development of the program. It
was featured in June 2004 and 2007 issues of the CCTHITA
Tribal News quarterly. The 2001 Sealaska Heritage
Foundation Annual Report highlighted the original TCLL
classroom. Students performed for Tribal gatherings and
celebrations, which proved to be the most effective way
of drawing attention to the program within the Native
community. No matter the challenges, staff/ administrative
turnover, and student academic ebbs and flows, in the minds
of the Native community the TCLL program remained the
most important, hopeful symbol of cultural respect and
opportunity in the District.
The culmination of support at the highest level occurred
in April, 2009 at the 74th Tribal Assembly, when delegates
passed Resolution TA/09-13, requesting
“The Juneau School District’s Tlingit Culture,
Language and Literacy Program shall receive
the continued support of the Juneau School
District to maintain or increase its standard of
education”
and that
“The TCLL program shall continue with the
Juneau School District’s full support, so that it
can maintain or increase its current educational
instruction with the same number of staff and
resources sufficient to enable its students to
meet or exceed the school district’s CORE
standards.”
Family Communications and Connections
“She sings the songs she is learning and
brings home projects she has done in class…
she reads the words to us, asks us to say it to
her, and then says it again. It has become a
classroom at home for us, as she is excited
about what she is learning and wants to share
with us.”
32
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
teachers often described some of their families and the
difficulties they faced in trying to connect with them. “It
is most frustrating to work with a few very (only a few)
dysfunctional families who need social services.”
As email took root as a primary communication vehicle
in general over the decade, it became even more problematic
for teachers to find parents. Some parents had email; some
did not. Some shared active phone numbers, some did not
update their numbers with school staff and became even
harder to find. And yet, at the same time, as one teacher
reported in Year Seven, “I get phone calls all the time from
parents “ What is going on?” they ask, referring to the
evolution of the program.
meeting/Family Gathering. Below is a sample of a four year
chart that shows parent opinions of essential components
of the TCLL program. It is important to note the degree
of satisfaction with the program, and how much parents
valued the language and culture emphasis. Willingness to
engage the whole family in Tlingit instruction got the least
favorable scores, though roughly 70% still indicated interest.
Getting parents to come to after school or evening language
sessions, at the school or a local library- which was tried as
an alternative – was the main reason why this was not as
valued. In survey narrative comments it was often language,
as shared by children at home that parents and grandparents
valued the most.
Family Nights/Gatherings and Parent Conferences
TLINGIT CULTURE, LANGUAGE AND
LITERACY PROGRAM: A COMPARISON OF
FALL 2004 - 2008 PARENT OPINIONS regarding
the TCLL program
In the first ten years, teachers organized and hosted
48 Family Nights/Gatherings, with a range of one/
year to seven/year. Grant goals had proposed monthly
Family events; this goal proved too ambitious for the
staff to organize, in addition to all their other program
responsibilities.
All program parents and families were invited via flyers
to these theme-based activities. Literacy strategies were
shared, parenting tips were offered, cultural skills and
knowledge were celebrated, student work was showcased.
At Family Nights children and their parents/grandparents
often got to select a book to take home, in an deliberate
effort to increase reading at home. Play performances were
the best attended events, with over 100 people at each play.
(Two of these occurred at the Noyes Pavilion on the UAS
campus, with teachers arranging for transportation for
families who needed it)
TCLL staff worked hard to attract parents, grandparents,
guardians and relatives to Family Gatherings, work that
entailed after school hours and extra duties. At times this
became a significant burden to staff, one which they insisted
they be compensated for. Program administrators attended
a number of Family Nights, and authorized some grant
funding to pay teachers to facilitate Family Gatherings.
(See Attachment 2 for listing of all Family Nights and
attendance)
2004 - 5 :
N = 39 (57%) parents who have a total
of 45 children (65%) in the program
(total = 69 students)
2005 - 6:
N = 27 (47%) parents who have a total
of 37children (54%) in the program
(total = 68 students)
2006 – 7
N = 47 (91%) parents who have a total
of 46 children (68% in the program
(total = 68 students)
2007 – 8
N = 37 (86%) parents who have a
total of 49 children (84%)
in the program
Parent Attitudes, from surveys and focus groups
(total = 58 students)
2008 – 9
Fall and spring surveys were sent home to parents in
Years One – Eight, as one way of soliciting parent input
about the program and ideas for future development. Open
ended questions such as “I wish that this program would…”
asked for ideas that would improve the goal of increased
family involvement education. Surveys also asked for
comments directed toward the Juneau School Board, which
described their family’s involvement with this program.
Results were tallied by the Evaluator and shared with
district administrators, Harborview principal, TCLL staff,
PAC members and sometimes parents, at the next parent
N = 46 (100%) parents who have a total
of 56 students in the 3 classrooms
(total = 56 students)
33
Tens Years Later
AGREE or STRONGLY AGREE
I am happy my child(ren) is in this program
I am very satisfied with what my child is learning in English.
I think the Tlingit language part of the daily program is very
important.
My child likes to go to school.
I usually read the newsletters and flyers my child brings home.
Fall
2004
100%
Fall
2005
96%
Fall
2006
100%
Fall
2007
97%
Fall
2008
98%
97%
93%
94%
92%
98%
100%
100%
96%
96%
100%
91%
100%
95%
98%
98%
97%
89%
100%
97%
91%
72%
93%
94%
100%
94%
95%
93%
94%
90%
91%
100%
89%
97%
95%
100%
72%
90%
63%
59%
97%
79%
100%
74%
96%
My child likes to share what he/she has learned in school every
night.
I check my child’s homework at least 3 nights a week.
I am impressed with the teachers in the program.
I want my family to learn Tlingit and am willing to come to
classes.
Family Nights are important to me, and our family.
Updated October, 2008
•
Narrative comments from these surveys and similar ones
distributed at parent conferences amplify Native parent
attitudes about the TCLL program and offer some insight
into what they value in education in general. Comparing
these comments to what students said above on pages XXX
Below are select, illustrative parent reflections.
•
Year One
•
•
•
“The start of the program was a little bumpy, as to
be expected.”
“Our daughter sings songs she is learning and
brings home projects she has done in class. She
reads the words to us, asks us to say them with
her and then says them again. It has become a
classroom at home for us, as she is excited about
what she is learning and wants to share with us.”
Year Three
•
Year Two
•
“I am so grateful my granddaughter has the
opportunity to learn our language. She never wants
to move from here because of the learning she is
getting.”
Last year after every parent teacher conference I
drove home crying. This year my child loves school,
she is learning, she is comfortable, she has an
identity.”
Through my son I got to learn my culture. “
•
“My child was not interested in writing and other
fine motor tasks in the past. In preschool and
Kindergarten he avoided fine motor tasks. His
reading and writing skills were below average
entering the TCLL classroom. He has developed
confidence and a desire to read and write. I am
thrilled to see him show more interest and start to
develop those skills.”
34
“The Harborview Tlingit Immersion Program is the
BEST program in Juneau School District, and is a
model of the rest of the state and nation. Bilingual
education and cultural pride will overwhelmingly
help with benchmarks, standards, NCLB and
anything else you throw at us.”
“Tlingit language was about out of society because
it was Native, not white. Good to hear the Native
language brought back. Stronger community ties
will build a stronger society, build stronger self
esteem for children to accept who they are and for
others to understand the Native culture. To help
discrimination from building. They learn to accept
all. It is good to hear that coming out of little ones’
mouths, not hate talk.
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
•
•
•
“I feel it is too bad the rest of the children in the
area don’t get the same privilege.”
It’s a huge success that the JSD has assumed
leadership in this effort. It’s what the Native
community has waited for, for years.”
“Change comes gradually.”
Year Four:
•
•
“This is not an “Indian program. It is open to all
students. The purpose of the program is for cultural
awareness along with academic success.”
“When is it going to be expected that the Tlingit
children will be able to identify with their culture
instead of having to fight for it all the time? This
program is making really good headway in this
direction, but there will come a time when parents/
teachers will need to fight for this right? Will
teachers want to do it? We need to think a little bit
larger to help this program grow to other buildings.
We need a place to vent concerns so that progress
can be made.”
COMMUNITY PARTNERS
In the first decade of the Harborview program
there were numerous very active partners from the
community, helping to ensure that the students and
staff had the resources they needed to provide the
program envisioned by grant goals and objectives.
They included:
Sealaska Heritage Institute
Goldbelt Heritage Foundation
Juneau School District Indian Studies program
Year Eight:
•
Alaska Native Sisterhood (ANS) Camp #70 and #2
“The TCLL program has created a small
community for us. My husband and I grew up
in a village and we feel comfortable with this
program creating this environment. My children
grew to love this program and the familiarity it
brings, the passion for our cultural heritage and
the knowledge that they learn, enhanced by Tlingit
culture.”
ANB Grand Camp
Big Brothers/Big Sisters
Central Council Tlingit Haida Indian Tribes of
Alaska
University of Alaska Southeast PITAAS (Preparing
Indigenous Teachers and Administrators for Alaskan
Schools) program
Alaska State Museum
35
Tens Years Later
ACADEMIC DATA
TCLL Tests Used to gauge academic
performance
•
•
•
•
•
•
“The Superintendent said achievement tests for the
Native culture and language students had been “up and
down” but its real test would be to see how many of its
students would graduate from high school, where Native
drop-out rates have typically been high. And...the higher
level of parental involvement and student attendance rates
in the program show it is giving kids a greater chance
to succeed. “There’s an excitement about learning, an
excitement about being in school, and excitement about
being part of the program in those classrooms.”
--- From Juneau Empire article, February, Year Seven
Test of Oral Language Development
Reading Recovery Battery
Bracken Basic Concept Scales
Benchmark Books
Developmental Reading Continuum
Direct Writing Assessment
how to respond to that essential question there was a
concerted effort to present a “bigger” notion of student
performance than that provided by a test score or two,
though standardized tests were naturally used most often by
the District to evaluate program effectiveness. TCLL staff
wanted to expand on the demonstration of student strengths
and capabilities.
Detailed charts of individual and group
performance on tests, such as the chart excerpted below
from earliest years of the program, were prepared by the
External Evaluator and District assessment staff, and shared
with TCLL staff, District administrators and interested
program partners, as appropriate. This matrix illustrates the
degree to which staff paid attention to a variety of indicators
that affect academic performance, including school
attendance.
Test DATA
Since the inception of the TCLL program a variety of
tests were used to gauge student achievement and growth
in reading, writing and oral language. Each of the three
federal grants focused particularly on literacy, given that
the origin of the initiative was in response to the 1996 OCR
investigation of the Juneau School District. Assessment
data was not reported for math or other subjects in federal
evaluations. In the early years a portfolio of assessments was
selected to demonstrate student progress. Brief descriptions
of each of these tests are contained in Attachment 5. The
TCLL staff was involved with determining this battery of
tests, in addition to those that were mandated by the District
and/or state. Teachers helped set the timing of testing, to fit
within the context of each classroom instructional schedule.
By comparing information gleaned from different
tests we get a more reliable idea of student progress and
growth and a richer portrait of student capabilities. The data
collected from varied tests was used in talks with teachers
at staff meetings and to compare with their own perceptions
which were based on daily interactions with students. This
practice continues in the District today, though discussions
of data on students are largely limited to state mandated
testing and the need to raise test scores.
The essential question posed by the TCLL federal grant
proposals and asked frequently by District administrators
and the public was “Are they meeting the standards?”
More specifically, Grants #1 and #2 set targets that 60% or
more of TCLL students would meet the standards, as defined
by the District. (This was prior to the national accountability
measures defined by No Child Left Behind)
The simple answer to that question is Yes and No. There
is a more complex story as well. In general, in more than
half the years of the decade, at each grade level, in Reading
and in Writing, 60% or more of the TCLL students met the
District standards. As TCLL staff continuously discussed
36
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
STUDENT
Grade
Bracken
TOLD
LI
(54)
OWT
(20)
Book
level
AbsenseQuarter1
(53 days)
A-2
(63)
A3
(58)
55
63
93
52
4
Beg
99%
1
1
1
x
x
66
55
81
52
15
34
K
7
11.5
2
x
x
45
47
53
45
0
16
EM
94%
0
5.5
2.5
-
61
-1
51
0
8
EM
100
15
12.5
3
50
23
39
50
2
21
Em
94%
7.5
15
10
x
x
42
23
30
50
2
30
Em
100
2
6
1
x
27
12
7
52
16
28
Beg
94%
3.5
4
2
x
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DICT
CORE
Read
CORE
Write
x
x
In Year Two, the program’s Parent Advisory Committee
requested comparisons of program students on the degree to
which they met District CORE expectations, and scores on
standardized tests. They asked to see how TCLL students
were doing compared to (1) non-program Harborview
students, (2) all Alaska Native students in the District, and
(3) all students in general. After one year the comparison
with other Harborview students was eliminated, due to lack
of interest on the part of parents.
The Year Two evaluation report stated that “For District
administrators the question of how TCLL children are
performing compared to all other Alaska Native primary
children in District schools has been a pervasive one,
particularly as they consider limited resources and support
available to programs such as these. Data from Years One
and Two would indicate that resources are well spent on
classrooms such as this, if the goal is improved academic
student performance. The charts show a large difference in
the percentage of children who are meeting the standards
in reading and writing when comparing this class to all
others.” This pattern of positive academic performance
relative to other Native students did not hold true throughout
the decade.
On the next page are two of the series of charts produced
in response to parent and PAC requests, from grades K and
5. TCLL students are represented on the left, compared to all
students in the District in the middle bars and Alaska Native
students (excluding the TCLL students) on the right. In order
to protect individual confidentiality, the exact number of
TCLL students is not indicated on the charts.
With Kindergarteners, there was no stable pattern
discernible about students meeting the CORE – the District’s
definition of “meeting the standards.” In 4 of the 10 years
TCLL students outperformed other Native students in
Reading; in 6 of ten years they outperformed Native peers in
Writing.
37
Tens Years Later
38
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
A quick look at the Grade 5 chart shows that TCLL students outperformed other Native peers in two of six years,
and in three of six years in Writing, in terms of meeting the standards.
The chart above showed that TCLL 5th grade students outperformed Native peers on SBA tests in four of six years, and in
Writing in five of the six years.
39
Tens Years Later
In February 2011 the District shared a report on TCLL academic test scores from 2005-2011 with the School
Board’s Program Evaluation Committee. Using the SBA scores combined for Grades 3 – 5 in the six year span, TCLL
students met the 60% Proficient goal in Reading in 4 years AND outperformed all other Native students in those same four
years. In Writing, over the same time span, TCLL students met the 60% goal in five of six years and outperformed other
Native students in four of the six years.
40
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
Comparative charts such as these were shared with School Board members annually, with PAC members and at
Native community meetings when requested. Eventually, as state testing mandates increased and became standardized the
District assessment staff produced all official data charts; periodically there were requests for TCLL data to be disaggregated
from the whole.
This analysis became more important as the profile of TCLL students changed, as more special needs students, children
living in poverty, children whose use of English is impacted by another language and the percentage of Native students
grew. These factors have been identified as those that most affect performance on standardized tests. Students “in the
middle” of the District’s famed “butterfly charts” like sample below illustrate those are most at risk. Teachers and schools
work to reduce the number in the middle, improving test scores and school ratings defined by No Child Left Behind.
TCLL program comparative reporting continued until Year Ten when the interest was no longer expressed, either from
parents or district administration. A complete set of comparative charts is in Attachment 6
Attendance data
Just as parents requested information on how TCLL students were doing academically compared to Native students in
other schools they were also interested in comparative attendance data. The chart below shows that in some years TCLL
students as a group had a fewer number of missed days than their Native peers. In no year was their average attendance
better than the overall district average for elementary student attendance. Attendance was one of the enduring challenges of
the TCLL program.
Average Number of DAYS MISSED in the School Year
YEAR
TCLL
1
(K-1 only)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
17
14
17
13
12.5
14
12
12
11
All elementary minus Native
students
Not Available
9
12
11
11
10
10
11
11
41
All other Native students only
Not Available
Not Available
14
13.5
13
11
11.5
13.5
13.5
Tens Years Later
2002
PROGRAM VISIBILITY
JanuaryMember, Alaska State Board of Education
visits program
JanuaryCommissioner of Education and Early
Development visit to classrooms
FebruaryAt the request of Commissioner of
Education, staff described program to
U. S. Secretary of Education at a DEED
meeting
Local Attention
The TCLL program became an interesting public
phenomena as it took shape in the Juneau School District.
Over seventeen Juneau Empire articles* and photographs
drew attention to its presence, within school and community
over a decade. Some of the media interest came in response
to parent conversations with Empire staff. One such meeting
occurred in spring of Year Four, as parents worked to bring
general awareness and support for the overall program
goals and to generate interest in expansion. The Capital City
Weekly also featured the program in several issues over the
ten year timeframe.
In April, 2004 program staff, aided by parents went to the
Central Council Tlingit Haida Tribes of Alaska (CCTHITA)
annual Delegate Assembly with TCLL brochures in hand
and a display board. Their aim was to familiarize the
Native community throughout Southeast with what was
happening in the Program. In August of that year, as the
program expanded through grade 5, the Central Council
hosted Back to School Session for all CCTHITA staff. The
Superintendent was present to review the District’s Strategic
Plan and explain all JSD programs and resources available
to Native families. A similar event occurred two years
later in September 2006 at the T&H Community Council
Education Fair for all Native families. TCLL staff joined
others from the District to give an overview of programs
and services to the 50 families in attendance. In April 2010
program students danced and spoke in Tlingit in front of
the full Delegate Assembly of Central Council and got
prolonged standing ovation from hundreds of delegates or
participants
Since 2006 TCLL students have danced at the biennial
Celebration hosted by SHI, in the main auditorium,
over 1,000 people from across the region and tourists in
attendance.
Several noteworthy events should be mentioned, to give
an idea of the visibility of the TCLL program in and beyond
Juneau, which helped earn it the notoriety it has today.
May
Program nominated to receive “Best
Program in the School” award Staff
honored for “outstanding service above
and beyond duties” at Harborview
Appreciation Breakfast
AugustProgram received Outstanding District
Program award
NovemberTeacher Kitty Eddy receives Eileen
Panigeo McLean Education Award at AFN
annual conference, nominated by Shee
Atiká Inc. from Sitka
2003
November Program selected as one of three statewide
Promising Practices Programs at the First
Alaskans Institute Summit on Native
Education Staff and Evaluator gave
a Power Point presentation about the
program at the Summit
2004
March
Students perform at Elizabeth Peratrovich
Community Celebration and the Elders
and Values Forum sponsored by CCTHITA
May
TCLL teachers selected as Outstanding
Educators at Southeast Native Women’s
Conference
_______________________________
(Empire articles appeared in issues on *December 17, 2000; May 29, 2002;
June 4, 2002 (in special Celebration issue); August 31, 2003; April 4, 2004;
May 31, 2005; October 13, 2006; May 21, 2006; February 18, 2007; May
18, 2007; July 6, 2007; July 16, 2007; February 4, 2008; February 19,
2008; December 19, 2008; July 4, 2008; February 17, 2009)
42
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
Regional, State, National, International
Program Presentations
While interest among teachers at the local level was not
as robust as had been hoped, there was more active interest
among Native stakeholders and leaders at the state and
national levels. In spring, 2001 two teachers from Klukwan
and one from Angoon visited the program and talked with
staff about how it got started. As staff learned more about
emerging evidence based practices effective with Native
students they were invited to present to varied audiences.
Grade Levels: K-8
Program presentation:
Juneau Native Education
Commission (now dormant)
National Association for Education
of Young Children Conference
ANS/ANB Grand Camp
Alaska Bilingual Multicultural
Conference
Alaska Art Education Association
Conference
Alaska State Literacy
Conference Workshop
Panel Presentation: Sealaska
regional conference
Clan Conference
Fall, 2000
A series of elementary level thematic units
featuring Tlingit language, culture, history,
and the local environments that Tlingit
people call home were developed in Juneau,
Alaska in 2004 – 8. The project was funded
by several grants awarded by the U. S.
Department of Education to the Juneau
School District (Building on Excellence
grant #S356AD30001 and Expanding on
Excellence, grant #S356AD60056) and
the Sealaska Heritage Institute (Boosting
Academic Achievement: Tlingit Language
Immersion Program grant (#92 – 0081844).
November 11, 2004
October 4, 2005
Lessons, units and teacher resource
materials were written by a team of teachers
and specialists including Juneau teachers
Kitty Eddy, Shgen George, Kathy Nielson,
Rocky Eddy, Paula Savikko, Elissa Borges,
Paula Savikko, and Jennifer Thompson. A
Lingít language team of translators, reviewers
and recorders included Jessica Chester,
Yarrow Varra, Linda Belarde, David Katzeek,
Mary Foletti, John Marks, June Pegues and
Nora Dauenhauer. Nancy Douglas, Cultural
Resource Specialist was often the team
leader. Curriculum consultants Julie Folta
and Toni Mallott assisted, and Annie Calkins
edited all lessons and units.
February 6, 2005
September 30, 2006
Overview
Several versions of the “salmon boy” story* are used in this literature unit.
Listening to one version of this story as told by a storyteller in Lingít and/or
English and then comparing different versions of the story is a central activity in
this unit. Learning about readers’ theatre and creating a readers’ theatre play
that integrates current biological and traditional knowledge about salmon is the
culminating activity.
Tlingit Cultural Significance
Shanyaak’utlaax, also called Aak’wtaatseen, is a traditional Tlingit story.
Variations of this story, as told by Deikeenáak’w in Sitka and by Kadishan in
Wrangell, were transcribed by ethnologist John R. Swanton in April, 1904 and
first published in 1909. This story teaches the correct way to treat salmon, thus
ensuring that salmon return to the streams and that salmon remain available as
a primary food source. Treating all living things with respect and using traditional
stories to learn how to do so are culturally valued behaviors in Southeast Alaska.
Elder/Culture Bearer Role
Elders or Culture Bearers may be able to read the story written in Lingít
(Shanyaak’utlaax by Marks, J, H. Chester, D. Katzeek, N. Dauenhauer and R.
Dauenhauer, Sealaska Heritage Institute, 2004) or may be able to tell this or
another version of the story. They could share their insights into the correct way
to treat salmon and how they learned this behavior.
Lessons were field tested in Juneau
classrooms.
All units are available online at
sealaskaheritage.org.
October 19, 2006
The contents of this curriculum were developed under the Tlingit Language Immersion Program (2004) and
Building on Excellence (2005) grants from the U.S. Department of Education. However, the contents do not necessarily
represent the policy of the Dept. of Education and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government
February 24, 2007
March 27, 2009
The National Museum of the American Indian in
Washington D.C. selected the TCLL program as the only
Alaskan featured program for a national “Electronic Field
Trip” on May 8, 2007, with a live broadcast of students and
teachers engaged in traditional activities at Auke Rec. It was
called “Listening to our Ancestors”; thousands of students
from 49 states viewed the show, which was one in a series
about each of the states. This event put the program onto the
national radar with tribal educators across Indian Country.
Having heard about the program from clan members,
relatives and reputation, the Yukon Territory approached
the District about adapting the program for use in their
province. Between June, 2006 – January, 2008 three teams
of 11 administrators from the Yukon Territory Department of
Education, Champagne & Aishinik First Nation and Takhini
Elementary School observed the Harborview program and
met with Sealaska Heritage Institute staff about the strengths
and challenges to date and to review the curriculum
resources. In April, 2008 two TCLL teachers traveled to
Haines Junction to present to the Site Council there, armed
with suggestions for replication.
43
Tens Years Later
BEST PRACTICES
Native community. They attracted interest by Native
parents. They took seriously the mission of the program and
became ambassadors of student success within a culture and
language based program.
4. Mentoring New Teachers
Over its first decade, a number of best practices emerged
as TCLL staff worked to achieve grant goals, parental
requests, and district expectations. Some of the following
practices directly tie to the traditional tribal values adopted
by the Tlingit, Haida, and Tsimpsian people.
1. Strong Focus on Relationships
Teachers nurtured sustained personal relationships
among students. They explicitly taught children to care
about and for each other. When personal and/or family crises
occurred teachers spent considerable time helping children
help and support each other through those circumstances.
This occurred at the middle school as well. As one TCLL
high school student said “It creates a community, like in the
old Tlingit long houses.”
Student interviews over the years revealed that
most of the original cohort group continuously named one
or more of the EoE peers when asked “Who are your best
friends?” This was despite differences in where they went to
school, what classes they to or what program they were in
(eg. Early Scholars)
2. Developing Cultural, Caring Communities
within Classrooms
The history of the TCLL program is also the story
detailing the development of classroom as culture – tight
knit and caring. The focus on TCLL families belonging to
a cultural community was exemplified through informal
contacts, weekly notes home and Family Nights in a
formal sense. Pairing Family Fun Nights with short parent
meetings proved highly effective. Informally, teachers
worked diligently to invite families into activities and
attended family events when invited. It was not uncommon
for teachers to be at children’s birthday parties or to attend
family celebrations or funerals. “The program emphasized
belonging. The classroom is a community of students and
their families and the students seem to be very close. The
teachers feel like extended family to our family and they
make my child feel very welcome and special at school.”
3. Highly dedicated Native teachers
Having Native teachers as role models and friends of
families had a significant influence on the trust level that
parents and grandparents felt toward the TCLL program.
Teachers had name recognition and respect within the
As the program took hold two TCLL teachers agreed
to host student teachers and/or those doing practicums at
UAS. This proved to be a very effective way to recruit new
teachers to the program when there were vacancies (this
happened twice). It was also an excellent way to acquaint
teachers-to-be with cultural ways of knowing, and effective
practices with Native students that would impact their future
teaching careers.
5. Demonstrated High Expectations for
Students
No matter what their life circumstances or academic
history prior to being in the Program the TCLL teachers
communicated high expectations for all students on a
daily basis. The list of supplemental services outlined in
Supplemental Services in Section II (page 11) indicates the
commitment to do whatever it took to get students to school
and ensure that they were meeting the District CORE and
scoring at the Proficient level on standardized tests. Verbal
encouragement and strict guidelines for academics were
repeatedly demonstrated during classroom visits throughout
the decade. For some students there was a need to constantly
strengthen their self esteem, as higher expectations were
voiced. As one teacher told the school board when asked
how the TCLL students were special, “They are different,
not special”. They were students of all abilities, interests
and family backgrounds. Teachers believed that all could
succeed, and graduate from high school.
6. Local, Cultural, Place-Based Curriculum
Units, integrated with district CORE and
Content Areas
The TCLL program staff developed a series of practical,
enriching cultural lessons that can be adapted by teachers in
any location, at varied grade levels. Though there are fewer
units at the upper elementary level and though there was
limited agreement about when certain units should be taught
during the school year, these units remain a strong signature
of the program, and helped define it as something unique
within the District.
7. Presence and Pride in Culture
Classrooms full of regalia, cultural artifacts, posters and
student artwork from cultural thematic units immediately
showed any visitor that these rooms were “special” and
different than other elementary rooms. These resources were
essential to program identity.
44
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
ENDURING CHALLENGES
8. Elders in Classrooms
“This program is greatly compromised without
the regular presence of Elders.” (Staff, 2008) Though it
took extra effort to invite, transport and support Elders in
classrooms, all teachers valued their presence – to teach
language, tell stories, assist individual children with reading,
participate in class celebrations, operate a learning center
focused on a traditional art form or talk to children who
needed extra encouragement. Among those who were a
regular visitor to the program for several years was David
Katzeek, who would gather all 50 – 60 students in the gym
first thing in the morning once a week to inspire all students.
He would deliver his inspirational messages in Tlingit,
showing how you could really use the language. He would
explain what each phrase meant, in traditional times and the
present. Collaborative Teaching with Cultural Specialists
and Elders, a practice which modeled the tribal value of
respect so often talked about, was at times achieved and was
cited as a highly effective cultural practice. Teachers wished
that it could have occurred more frequently.
1. Attendance
From the start attendance was an issue with TCLL
students, even though some of them had perfect attendance
records during any given quarter. For example, in Year One,
two students missed 33 days of school – over a month.
Three students missed over 20 days. Teachers devised
ways to emphasize the importance of being in school as the
fundamental avenue to being successful in school, which
was the overarching goal for Native students. After three
years of worrisome attendance data teachers made improved
attendance the annual program goal. Their concerted
effort boosted the average attendance in the program to be
comparable to all Native students across the District, and
within two days of overall elementary attendance. For all
the reasons students did not attend school, some of which
reflected difficult family circumstances, the message was the
same: Go to school every day.
2. Program Image
In the last five years of the decade, as challenges within
the program surfaced more publicly, accountability reporting
became more widespread, and the overall demographic
profile of the TCLL student population shifted the
perception of the program changed. It became viewed more
of a “remedial program” for Native students who needed
extra help than one rich and powerful for the inclusion of
culture and language. A number of Native parents worried
that their high performing students would not be challenged
academically in the TCLL program if most of the teacher’s
time was devoted to students who needed help. Turning
this perception around – with simple things such as a new,
attractive brochure, and more difficult things like ensuring
more equity in those enrolled in the program - continues to
be a challenge.
3. Transition to Middle School
After several, if not all, elementary grades together in
a tight community with a distinctive curriculum, going to
middle school – Dzantik’i Heeni Middle School most oftenproved to be a challenge. Though efforts were made to keep
the group together as a whole in one of the middle school
houses in the end administrators divided them up across
houses, “so that their leadership skills could be shared”.
This decision made continued Tlingit language learning
impossible. (building off of what they already knew) It
reduced the cohesion and support that students experienced
45
Tens Years Later
at Harborview. Several students “got into trouble”, and
it was more difficult for the one middle school teacher
funded by grants to connect with parents like the elementary
teachers had done. At the same time, for some students and
families it was important that they “be launched” into the
middle school experience on their own and were forced to
make new friends and act independently.
This challenge was partially addressed by two
federal, ANEP “Transitions” grants awarded to the Juneau
School District which enabled marine science camps and
culture camps in the summer for incoming and outgoing
middle school students, they were not able to serve enough
Native students who were interested. And for the TCLL
students, unless there was specific outreach to fifth graders
and their parents, they did not tend to enroll in the camps.
to initial special education meetings where their child is
being discussed. Most parents are challenged to understand
special education regulations and their rights as parents in
the process of identifying and serving students with special
needs.
6. Family Support
Some TCLL families have difficult lives by any index of
well being. Their children are affected on multiple levels,
including attendance and attitude at school, academic
performance, and willingness to participate in diverse
activities. They are challenged to be the proud and confident
Native students that parents and the community would
wish for them. There were initial conversations with Tribal
Family Case Managers to investigate how cooperative
agreements might be signed between the District/program
and the Tribe so that confidentiality could be protected and
families might be better served. TCLL teachers frequently
mentioned the need for trained social workers who could
regularly help families.
4. Intermediate Grade Curriculum
As the full impact of No Child Left Behind regulations
took hold and the pressure of student testing increased,
intermediate teachers were challenged to deliver a culture
based, place based, language rich curriculum AND follow
the District’s curriculum and textbooks. There was a
collision of culture and conformity, as teachers began
eliminating cultural field trips because they “took away
from reading or math instructional blocks”. The pressure to
improve test scores of Native students in the program grew
after the first five years and resulted in a greater degree of
frustration with the intermediate teachers. They did not feel
support or guidance in how to adapt the mostly primary
level integrated units and then incorporate the units into
their daily lessons coming largely from district textbooks in
math, science and language arts. “The program” in grades 4
-5 slowly eroded in its cultural emphasis.
7. Leadership
Active, hands-on leadership and engagement with
program staff and families is a continuing challenge.
District administrators assigned oversight of the TCLL
program are typically in charge of multiple programs and/
or grants, and may supervise a number of district staff. The
time devoted to being actively involved with the TCLL
program was limited and depended on the interest and skills
of the individual administrator.
Since Year Three the Harborview School housed
not only the TCLL program but also the District’s
Montessori program, which has grown in size each year.
The Harborview Principal is therefore tasked with staff
supervision, student safety and supplemental services, parent
advisory committees and curriculum implementation for
“the regular school” along with two distinct “schools within
the school.” Again, there is very limited time to effectively
engage with the TCLL program. This lack of leadership has
definitely been a recurrent challenge.
5. Special Education
As the demographic profile of TCLL students began
to change in Years Five- Six, the number of students with
special needs increased. In the early years TCLL teachers
fought hard to provide interventions to students who needed
help in speech or language, the special ed area most often
designated for program children. They worked with SCOTs
teams to decide whether it was truly in the best interest of
students to be pulled out, which often happened when an
Elder was present or an interesting cultural activity was
underway. Teachers defended “fragile” students’ need to
remain with the group where they knew routines, classroom
expectations and personalities. At times the SCOTs teams
agreed and students remained in the classroom, with special
education para professionals at their sides. At other times,
students were required to go to other classrooms to receive
services.
In many cases and interviews with parents, there is a
need for Native parent advocates to accompany parents
8. Preschool Connections
For a number of reasons it has been difficult to forge
interagency collaborations that are honest, equitable
partnerships relating to early childhood education. Head
Start systems and District systems caused strained relations
among those trying to work across the two systems. Efforts
to create more flexible ways to meet student, teacher and
parent needs were thwarted by procedures, schedules,
accountability measures and staff personalities. While it
seemed imperative to link preschool to primary grades
on a number of levels, this intention was never fully or
effectively achieved with the TCLL program.
46
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
PROGRAM OUTCOMES AND IMPLICATIONS
8. There is now a sequential Tlingit language curriculum in
place, the first of its kind in Alaskan K – 12 schools.
OUTCOMES
9. Dozens of students have begun to learn the Tlingit
language; a number can use it conversationally. You can
HEAR the language on school playgrounds for the first time
in a century.
At the end of a decade of work this report illustrates
evidence-based practices that have had positive outcomes
for students, teachers, and the Juneau School District. The
TCLL program started waves of interest among Native
parents, and initiated waves of change across the district,
some of which were more obvious and far reaching than
others.
10. A large library of Tlingit cultural curriculum resources
was created and widely disseminated.
11. Within the Native community TCLL is a stable
component of the Juneau School District. Everyone assumes
its presence at Harborview, that TCLL students – along
with peers from Gastineau and Glacier Valley schools –
will be dancing and singing/speaking in Tlingit at every
Celebration, CCTHITA Tribal Assembly, Clan Conference
and ANB/ANS Grand Camp, when they are held in Juneau.
1. The program still exists. Though its original mission
may have faded and it is no longer in the forefront of the
public eye, in 2011 the Juneau Board of Education and
administration voted to fund the TCLL program at its
current level, at a time when drastic budget reductions
occurred across the District. This action indicates the
value of the Program to the District, even in the face of its
challenges.
12. There is a significant consciousness on the part of more
teachers, more administrators about models for Native
student programming. There is not always noticeable action
affecting what happens in each school in the District in
relation to Native student success when it is viewed more
broadly than test scores, but there has been a growing
consciousness - which precedes action.
2. A model for a place based, culture based school within
an elementary school – the original goal - WAS created
and sustained, with many lessons learned about effective
practice to be shared with other interested schools.
IMPLICATIONS
The Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy program
is one many in the constellation of programs in the Juneau
School District, some of which are driven and guided
by federal grants, some of which are District funded and
monitored. Its importance in the District overall must
be considered in light of other efforts to improve the
educational opportunities and performance of Alaska Native
students. The administration, staff, and School Board must
place the issues and challenges of Alaska Native education
alongside those of all students in Juneau. At the same time,
the Native community, as individuals and organizations,
are active, often outspoken advocates for the rights of their
children to receive equitable opportunities and rich learning
activities within a system that has historically not fulfilled
that promise. As this ten year history has indicated, a united
vision for Native student success throughout the K – 12
system, shared and owned across the community by Native
and non-Native citizens is foundational for any long term
impact.
District leaders, partnered with Native leaders and
community leaders would do much to craft this vision.
There are strategies and action plans from past programs
that would feed into such a vision, which, if widely endorsed
by parents and organizations could propel future grant
writing efforts and program development.
3. The TCLL program remains the only sequential culture
and language based program of its kind in Southeast Alaska.
Other schools have taken up the mission, knowing it IS
possible, and adapted ideas and practices to their school and
community culture, interest and needs.
4. 60% of the first group of ten students enrolled in
the original primary class graduated from high school
in 2012. This is compared to the overall Alaska Native
graduation rate in Juneau in 2009-10 (the most current
public reporting) of 47%.
5. One student, who was in the TCLL program from grades
2 – 5, was awarded a Gates scholarship to fund all college
expenses through a doctorate; she will attend Pacific
University in Oregon to start with in 2013 and may continue
on to Stanford University for graduate studies.
6. During this ten year time span, TCLL students generally
did as well or better than their Native peers on standardized
tests in reading and writing.
7. TCLL established and nurtured positive connections with
Native parents, many of whom had negative experiences
with the District as students, and as parents of students in
other schools.
47
Tens Years Later
Partnerships, a cornerstone of the initial TCLL program
and a requirement of most federal grants, are difficult to
maintain through the decades. The TCLL story illustrates
that without authentic respect among the partnering
organizations and without leaders to follow through on
mutually agreed upon actions, partnerships are largely
rhetorical and do not yield progress toward a vision or goals.
At recent District program evaluation hearings, testimony
from several Native parents called for a standing Native
Education Advisory Committee, to enact a respectful
partnership with parents. In 2012 the District, University of
Alaska and Sealaska Heritage Institute signed a partnership
agreement whereby they will collaboratively educate
new teachers and faculty about the history, language and
cultures of local indigenous peoples. Both are examples of
partnerships that might activate a long-term commitment to
a common vision.
The TCLL history suggests that we could re-frame
the discussion about this, and other programs’ success. In
addition to the necessary and important standardized tests,
measures of accountability and reporting to the community
could also incorporate what is valued by Alaska Native
parents and the Native community. There could be multiple
ways of documenting and celebrating student success, and
program effectiveness in light of what is valued.
A study done in 2006 by the Alaska Native Policy
Center, First Alaskans Institute and Institute for Social and
Economic Research at UAA entitled Alaska Native Student
Vitality: Community Perspectives on Supporting Student
Success was the culmination of interviews with 45 Alaska
Native community leaders and community members. “This
study came about as frustrations surfaced in Alaska Native
and research communities about measures such as school
attendance, standardized test scores, and high school
graduation and dropout rates being used to define Alaska
Native student success and failure.” The definition of
student success, which reframes thinking about the TCLL
program data, that this study offers, based on participants’
responses, is “a successful Alaska Native student is one
who can set and achieve goals because he knows his own
worth and value, understands his responsibility to his
community and is prepared to pursue whatever life path he
chooses…a student who is confident and secure in who he
is.” Hearing what TCLL students had to say (pages 19-21)
about the impact of the program on themselves and their
dreams for the future tell us that most of these youth know
proudly who they are as Native people and feel a sense of
community – to their younger siblings and relatives, their
aging grandparents, aunties and uncles and then to others
in Juneau. Though their test scores were not what some had
hoped they would be after the attention and extra efforts of
the TCLL staff, students spoke without hesitation of their
sense of self worth and value. By and large, there is the
promise that they will be contributing and caring members
of our, and other communities. There are opportunities to
focus on documented individual successes and the program
best practices to approach future evolution of this and other
District programs from a strength-based foundation.
The TCLL history is ripe with ideas for further
investigation and research that could assist the District in
its pursuit of educational improvements and contribute
to the broader field of research on Alaska Native student
education in urban and rural schools. Questions might
include such things as “How did the All School model of
cultural inclusion at Gastineau differ from the Harborview
School Within a School model at Harborview, in terms of
student and/or school performance?” “How did student
perceptions of themselves, their culture and their academic
performance change when they got to middle school?”
“What happened to the original cohort group four years
after high school graduation?” “What aspects of the TCLL
program should be embraced by other schools in Juneau
and other communities interested in culture and language
preservation?” A commonly agreed upon research agenda,
with SHI, Goldbelt Heritage Foundation, Central Council
Tlingit Haida Tribes of Alaska, UAS, the District and other
interested agencies and organizations would complement
any grant applications and strengthen the commitment to a
common vision for Native student success in Juneau. It is
our hope that others will soon put in their paddles, and move
with the tides of interest and possibility. There is no time
better than right now.
Villegas, M. & Prieto, R. (2006). “Alaska Native Student Vitality:
Community Perspectives on Supporting Student Success”. Anchorage,
Alaska: Alaska Native Policy Center, First Alaskans Institute, Institute for
Social and Economic Research.
48
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
TEN YEARS LATER
A History of the Tlingit Culture,
Language and Literacy Program
in the Juneau School District
ATTACHMENTS
49
Tens Years Later
ATTACHMENT 1
TCLL PARENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING DATES AND ATTENDANCE
“This program is about rectifying an injustice; the loss
of language and the breaking up of families when children
were sent away from home to boarding schools….the best educational practices ensure that students can read and
write but they know who they are too.” — TCLL Parent
There were 41 Parent Advisory Meetings for the
TCLL program between 2000 and 2010. Attendance at
them ranged from 2 – 30, with an average attendance of
6 or 7.
The meetings were typically held in one of the
classrooms at Harborview School. Meetings were
calendared at the beginning of each year and reminders were
sent home in weekly classroom newsletters. Discussions
about the future of the program tended to draw the highest
attendance.
2004-5
September 14, 2004 (10 parents)
October 12(5)
November 9 (4)
(Topic was drafting by laws and procedures for PAC)
December 7 (8)
January 11 (5)
February 15 (5)
March 8 (5)
April 5 (1)
July 26, 2005 (9)
2005-6
September 20, 2005 (6 parents)
October 11(6)
November 15 (1)
December 13 (2)
January 10NA
2000-01
2006-7
First meeting - November 2, 2000 (2 parents)
January 18, 2001 (2)
March 15 (1)
May 10 (5)
September 7, 2006 (30 parents)
January 12 (16)
March 21 (5)
stakeholders from Native community rather than parents
June 6 (2)
2001-2
The PAC grew more active throughout 2001 as the original
grant was ending and there was concern about continuing
the program.
2007-8
February 29, 2008 (13 parents) (Topic: looking at program
strengths, weaknesses)
March 7 (13 Parents)
May 16 (4)
September 21, 2001 (9 parents)
November 27(13)
January 31 (11)
February 28 (3)
April 17(11)
2008-9
2002-3
February 6,2009 (21 parents)
February 11
Community meeting re: Federal grant fund availability
April 8 (12)
May 26 (10)
April 13(5)
October 30, 2002 (8 parents)
January 23(8)
2003- 4
January 27, 2004 (3 parents)
March 11 (8)
April 13 (2)
May 11 (3)
50
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
ATTACHMENT 2
FAMILY NIGHTS: THEMES, ATTENDANCE
There were 48 Family Nights hosted by the TCLL program between 2000 and 2010, mostly at Harborview School.
Attendance ranged from 9 to 160, with an average of 37 family members.
The most popular family events were play performances or cultural Koo Eex celebrations. These family events were in
addition to Harborview School parent/family activities and were orchestrated by the TCLL staff.
2000-1
May 30
attended
Play, potluck dinner
106 family members
Play, potluck dinner
96
2001-2
May 27
2002-3
December 5
Family Social
100 (Topics: Overview of grant, history of program, PAC, grant and future funding)
2003-4
October 10, 2003
October 31 Halloween Party
November 13
December 9
March 5, 2004 June 2 Play Performance 26
25
19
26
16
160
2004 – 5
August 28, 2004
Back to School
September 28
Berries and Tlingit Bingo
October 26 Salmon Celebration
December 14 March 4, 2005
May 20
Play, potluck at UAS
15
17
48
92
23
116
2005- 6
August 19, 2005 Family Gathering at Cope Park
September 16 Family Fun Night with traditional activities 49
October 28
Salmon Celebration
November 18 Literacy Lunch
15
February 16, 2006 Elizabeth Peratrovich Celebration
61
w/ TV crew making film about her
March 14 Family Bowling
13
April 18 Bowling
13
May 19
End of Year Celebration
69
51
Tens Years Later
ATTACHMENT 2
FAMILY NIGHTS: THEMES, ATTENDANCE
CONTINUE D
2006-7
September 15, 2006 November 2 December 15
February 16
May 4, 2007
Family Bowling
Fall Festival of Fun
Holiday Family Potluck Elizabeth Peratrovich Day
39
10
10
53
29
2007 – 8
August 31, 2007
September 28
October 26
November 2
November 30
February 15, 2008 April 11
New School Year Potluck
Family Math Night Spooktacular Stories and Potluck
Native American Night Trimester Awards and Potluck
Elizabeth Peratrovich Day
Healthy Futures Family Night
50
48
88
(5 volunteers, no sign in)
33
60
34
2008-9
September 11, 2008
October 30
November 21
March 20, 2009
April 3
May 8
June 5
Back to School Event Fall Festival of Fun
Native Games and Potluck
Drills and Thrills (basketball)
Sharing Our Language
Koo Eex at Glacier Valley Family Picnic 45
14
18
16
26
72
40
Holiday Celebration
Elizabeth Peratrovich
Basketball with Mr. Josh
Beach Day 63
75
9
14
2009-10
December 18, 2009
February 16, 2010
March 19
April 16
52
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
ATTACHMENT 3
TCLL PROGRAM STAFF TRAINING
2000
Douglas, Eddy
Standards for World Languages, language development
models for primary student training
2001
Douglas
2001
“Teaching Methods for Alaska Native Languages”
(SHI/UAS)
Douglas, Eddy
“Classrooms as Cultures” (UAS)
2002
Douglas
2004
Miyasato
Becker
2005
“Teaching Methods for Alaska Native Languages”
(SHI/UAS)
Intermediate Reading Institute
Individualized early childhood practices training from
Nancy Norman
George, Nielson
National Association of Bilingual Educators Conference
George
Math in a Cultural Context training
George
Alaska Bilingual/Multicultural Education Conference
George, Miyasato, Douglas
Digital Storytelling in-class training, mentoring
2006
Douglas, Holly
Douglas
Steven Grey Morning Training, Montana
Alaska Educational Innovations Network Symposium on Language Immersion
2007
Douglas, Steven Grey Morning 2008
Eddy, James, Douglas, Chester
2010
Dean
Language Acquisition Workshop
Salmon Camp, Klukwan
Place Based Workshop
53
Tens Years Later
ATTACHMENT 4
TRAINING FOR DISTRICT STAFF
2002
February 19
Eddy and Douglas give 1 hour workshop “Culture in the
Classroom” at district wide in-service (7 attend)
2004
November 12
George and Nielson shared units w/ Harborview staff
2006
March 10
Holly presentation on Tlingit Children’s Songs for district RALLY staff (6 attend)
2007
July
Salmon Camp (in Klukwan) for teachers (6 Gastineau staff and Principal)
2008
August
Salmon Camp (Klukwan) for teachers (16 Harborview staff and Principal)
2009
Throughout year
June Weekend Workshops (10 JSD staff funded with stipends; credit
available through Goldbelt Heritage Foundation
Workshop topics were based on curriculum units (eg Plants
Teacher Culture Camp (limit: 12 teachers) included 25 TCLL students in afternoon sessions
2010
June Place Based Education workshop for all district staff, funded and hosted by Goldbelt Heritage Foundation
54
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
ATTACHMENT 5
BRIEF OUTLINE OF TESTS USED IN TCLL PROGRAM
Test of Oral Language Development
Bracken Basic Concept Scale–
Revised (BBRS-R)
2000 – 2009
In 1996, the Juneau School District conducted an oral
language study as part of its broader review of all special
education policies and assessments mandated by the Office
of Civil Rights. Ninety-two Alaska Native children aged 5 –
8 were tested using the Test of Oral Language Development
(TOLD). After an analysis comparing their performance to
the national norming group and to local non-Native students,
norms were set for Juneau Native students for each of the six
sub-tests of the TOLD. This was done in partnership with
the testing company and a committee of local Native parents
who were involved with the OCR reviews. The TOLD was
selected by program staff as a way to gauge growth relating
to oral language, which was a primary goal of the Grant #1.
The test was individually administered by a district certified
Speech and Language Specialist twice a year to the TCLL K
– 2 students, during the first nine years. It was discontinued
in 2010.
In Year One, the group composite average score at the
initial October testing was 84, which ranked that group at
the bottom of the Below Average range. By Year Eight,
after a concerted emphasis on oral language development
by program staff, the average composite score had risen to
94, putting students solidly in the Average range. In Year
Nine students had an average composite score of 92. “TOLD
results in 2008-9 showed most children made personal gains
within the standard error of measurement between pre and
post testing, indicating they benefited from the language
focused environment of this program.” 2000 – 2003
This test is used to assess children between the ages
of 2 ½ years and 8. It measures comprehension of
308 foundational and functionally relevant educational
concepts in 11 subtests or concept categories. Six of
those, including colors, numbers/counting, letters, sizes,
shapes and comparisons, assess children’s knowledge of
those “readiness concepts that parents and early teachers
traditionally teach children”. The scale enables you to
assess important conceptual and receptive language abilities
in children, rather than only their knowledge of common
vocabulary words. This test was individually administered
to TCLL primary students in Years One and Two and was
used by teachers for skill based instruction in areas where
children needed help.
In Years One -Two a total of four children were
considered delayed in early school readiness skills. All but
one had improved significantly by the end of the school year.
By Year Three the state of Alaska mandated a
Kindergarten Developmental Profile to capture similar
information about school readiness skills.
Reading Recovery Tests
2000 – 2003
Year Nine data confirmed a continuation of the trend
– that there was a slow, gradual increase in overall oral
language skills and performance. It takes time to reverse
patterns of communication among families; in this case
where use of “school” words and phrases were not being
used regularly at home, according to the baseline analysis of
the TOLD.
This battery of five sub-tests- Letter Identification,
Concepts about Print, Dictation, Word Recognition and
Writing – was used the Juneau School District extensively
in the 1990s. The battery provided teachers with useful
information about children’s awareness of print and early
reading behaviors, and based on their performance, tagged
students in need of daily intensive reading instruction
delivered by one of the District’s six Reading Recovery
certified teachers. Information from these tests was given to
the TCLL primary teacher as she determined student report
card grades and whether students were meeting CORE
expectations. It was not otherwise reported.
The District no longer collects this data, so any further
confirmation of the uphill trend is unknown.
The Reading Recovery program in Juneau was
discontinued in Year Three of the project.
55
Tens Years Later
ATTACHMENT 5
BRIEF OUTLINE OF TESTS USED IN TCLL PROGRAM
CONTINUED
Benchmark Books Assessment 2000 – 2007
support in reading. Taken together, student performance at a
Benchmark Book reading assessment event and their typical
performance as marked on the Reading Continuum guided
teachers on marking the report card. In this way there was
uniformity about whether students had met what the District
defined as the CORE content and skills at each grade level.
Benchmark Books are a leveled set of books used for
systematic assessment within a balanced literacy program
at the classroom or District level. This assessment was
individually administered to children in Juneau by certified
classroom teachers. It offered useful information about
whether children were prepared to ready or currently reading
“real books” that were on grade level, as determined by
District staff. Classroom sets of books were leveled by
District Reading Specialists, and were linked to the Reading
Recovery program in operation across the District. The
District set expectations for what level of books children
should be reading independently, and instructionally by the
end of each primary grade.
Of the 18 children in the TCLL class at the end of Year
One, 44% were reading above level 14; two first graders
were reading at level 24, which is the end of second grade
expectation. “Remarkable growth was made last year in
the area of actually “reading real books” and raised issues
about what continued guided experiences with leveled books
might do for the improvements of performance with Alaska
Native students.” (Year Two Evaluation Report)
Use of this assessment across the District was
discontinued in 2007.
Developmental Profile
2003 - 2010
As part of its Quality Schools Initiative in 1998 the
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED)
required that all Districts implement a Developmental
Profile for incoming Kindergarteners. In program Year
Six (2006) the State Board of Education endorsed a set of
Early Learning Guidelines, which reflected expectations for
children’s knowledge and behavior from birth to age five.
The Department subsequently revised the Developmental
Profile to reflect the new Guidelines. The Profile has goals
and indicators in five domains: Physical Well –Being,
Health and Motor Development, Social and Emotional
Development, Approaches to Learning; Cognition and
General Knowledge; and Communication, Language and
Literacy. Test data from all incoming Kindergarteners is sent
to the Department annually.
Writing Assessment
Developmental Continuum: Reading 2000 – 2006
2001 - 2009
Throughout the late1990s and well in the 2000s the
district supported direct writing assessment that occurred
twice/year in grades K-5, using samples of student writing
in response to a common prompt. Juneau teachers selected
prompts for each grade level, such as “If you could change
one thing to make the world a better place, what would it
be? Explain what you would change, how you would change
it and how it would make the world a better place.” Samples
were scored by trained teachers/staff and reviewed for
reliability in scoring. Each writing sample was scored using
a six point rubric on six traits of effective writing: Ideas and
Content, Conventions, Word Choice, Organization, Sentence
Fluency and Voice.
Writing Assessment results have not been reported to
the District assessment office since 2009. The process and
reporting is now entirely school based.
The District’s Developmental Continuum in Reading
was also used to provide further evidence of student
performance. The Continuum listed in two columns the
reading Skills/Strategies and Comprehension skills which
a child regularly uses in day-to-day reading activities. It
was marked by the classroom teacher at regular intervals
throughout the school year and was correlated to the
Benchmark Books assessment.
After over ten years of local teachers using the
Continuum District administrators felt confident of
reliability assurances and coded performance on the
Continuum as typical at each grade level. For example,
it was agreed that a Kindergarten child marked at level A
of the Continuum did indeed meet the district standard,
while a first grader marked at level A would not meet the
standard for the grade level and therefore needed extra
56
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
ATTACHMENT 6
COMPARATIVE CHARTS OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE: DISTRICT CORE
Juneau School District
Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program 2000-2010
Elementary Level: Harborview School
Students meeting the District CORE standards
(Original 2000 grant goal: 60% of target students meet or exceed academic standards.)
Grade 1
READING
100
2000-01
Percentage of Student Population
90
2001-02
79
80
70
2002-03
72
71
69
62
67
60
60
70 69
62 62
2003-04
50
2004-05
57
55
45
65
62
2005-06
52
50
48
45
44
41
2006-07
46
42
40
40
2007-08
2008-09
35
27
30
2009-10
20
20
13 13
10
0
Tlingit1!Program
District
2!
AK Native,3!District
375-361-362-378-318-357-344-370-336-354
< 20 Students
N=
86-93-78-88-79-82-57-69-77-73
WRITING
100
85
83
79
70
60
50
40
30
83
85 86
75 76
80
63
60
2001-02
2002-03
73
67
64
55
85
83
74
72 73
71
90% or more proficient Percentage of Student Population
2000-01
90
65
2003-04
68
62 61
2004-05
58
56
49
52
2008-09
2009-10
10
0
N=
2006-07
2007-08
38
20
0
2005-06
1! Program
Tlingit
< 20 Students
2!
District
375-361-362-378-318-357-343-370 -336-355
57
3! District
AK Native,
86-93-78-88-79-82-57-69-77-73
Tens Years Later
Juneau School District
Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program 2000-2010
Elementary Level: Harborview School
Students meeting the District CORE standards
(Original 2000 grant goal: 60% of target students meet or exceed academic standards.)
Grade 2
READING
2001-02
Percentage of Student Population
100
2002-03
90
2003-04
80
76
80
71
70
70
72
70 71
67
77 75
2004-05
67 69
59
56
55
60
2005-06
58 60 59 57 59
63
2006-07
2007-08
49
50
2008-09
44
40
2009-10
38
40
29
30
20
10
10
0
Tlingit1!
Program
District
2!
N=
AK Native,
3! District
404-398-355-368-333-355-361-368
< 20 Students
89-95-80-70-78-88-60-63
WRITING
2001-02
2002-03
90
2003-04
85
90
79
80
70
30
20
10
0
N=
72
75
75
2004-05
78
0
N=
2006-07
61
55
44
2005-06
72
66
60
90% or more proficient 40
79
66
60
50
78 76
70
70
90% or more proficient Percentage of Student Population
100
53
44
2007-08
55 54
2008-09
42
29
0
Tlingit Class
1! Program
Tlingit
(5)
< 20 Students
2!District
404-398-355-368-333-355-361-368
58
AK Native, District
3!
AK Native,
District
89-95-80-70-78-88-60-63
2009-10
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
Juneau School District
Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program 2000-2010
Elementary Level: Harborview School
Students meeting the District CORE standards
(Original 2000 grant goal: 60% of target students meet or exceed academic standards.)
Grade 3
READING
Percentage of Student Population
100
2002-03
85
90
2003-04
74 74 76 76 72
70
69
80
70
56
60
50
60
63
2004-05
2005-06
64
64
61 60
58 58
57
56
2006-07
54
47
44
38
40
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
30
22
20
10
0
Tlingit1!Program
N=
< 20 Students
AK Native,
3! District
District
2!
91-100-76-76-76-82-59-54
398-361-346-388-344-360-346-362
WRITING
2002-03
2003-04
Percentage of Student Population
100!
2004-05
90!
2005-06
78
80!
75
67
70!
60!
54
50!
40!
67
2006-07
72 70 71 72 73
69
68 67
2007-08
56
56
50
46
51 49
57 58 55
54
33
30!
20!
10!
0!
N=
1!
Tlingit
Program
< 20 Students
2!District
398-361-346-388-335-360-346
398-361-346-388-335-360-346-363
59
3!
AK Native,
District
91-100-76-76-76-82-59-55
2008-09
2009-10
Tens Years Later
Juneau School District
Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program 2000-2010
Elementary Level: Harborview School
Students meeting the District CORE standards
(Original 2000 grant goal: 60% of target students meet or exceed academic standards.)
Grade 4
READING
Percentage of Student Population
100
2003-04
90
80
80
70
78
77
80
76 76
69
64
2004-05
73 74
63 63
60
57
60
50
2005-06
71
53
57
2006-07
62
56 57
2008-09
2009-10
38
40
2007-08
30
20
10
0
Tlingit1!
Program
N=
< 20 Students
AK Native,
3!District
District
2!
92-84-81-72-73-77-56
390-350-366-353-351-354-357
WRITING
2003-04
2004-05
Percentage of Student Population
100!
2005-06
90!
2006-07
80!
70
70!
60!
50!
50
75
75
67
63
69 67
2007-08
72 71
68 70
2008-09
61 60
50
49
46
51
38
40!
30!
20!
10!
0!
N=
1!
Tlingit
Program
< 20 Students
2!
District
390-350-366-352-351-354-357
60
2009-10
57
3!
AK Native,
District
92-84-81-71-73-77-56
52
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
Juneau School District
Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program 2000-2010
Elementary Level: Harborview School
Students meeting the District CORE standards
(Original 2000 grant goal: 60% of target students meet or exceed academic standards.)
Grade 5
READING
Percentage of Student Population
100
2004-05
90
77
80
70
76
80
2006-07
74
73
65
64
2007-08
65 65
62
60
58
60
2005-06
83 83
80
79
56
2008-09
2009-10
50
44
40
30
20
10
0
1!
Tlingit Program
N=
2!
District
3!
AK Native, District
384-368-341-369-377
< 20 Students
78-94-69-75-77
WRITING
2004-05
Percentage of Student Population
100!
2005-06
2006-07
90!
80
80!
78
71
76
72
76
72
76
2007-08
73
2008-09
70!
60
60!
50!
63
61
55
51
56
45
41
40
40!
30!
20!
10!
0!
1!
Tlingit Program
N=
< 20 Students
2!
District
384-368-340-369-336
61
3!
AK Native, District
78-94-69-75-77
2009-10
Tens Years Later
Juneau School District
Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program 2000-2010
Elementary Level: Harborview School
Students meeting the District CORE standards
(Original 2000 grant goal: 60% of target students meet or exceed academic standards.)
Kindergarten
READING
2000-01
Percentage of Student Population
100
90
80
80
83
83
84 83
80
78
88
82
79
87
2001-02
83
70
70
69
2002-03
83
78
75
68
71
2003-04
71
69
60
60
2005-06
55
50
50
2004-05
69 69
2006-07
51
49
2007-08
2008-09
38
40
30
2009-10
20
20
10
0
Tlingit1!
Program
N=
District
2!
< 20 Students
335-351-379-318-340-319 -320-336-337-329
AK Native,
3! District
87-75-80-77-76-56-68-73-80-74
WRITING
2000-01
90
80
90
80
88 87
80
20
10
0
N=
86
84
77 79
79 80
73
2002-03
82 82
2003-04
75
2004-05
2005-06
56
50
90% or more proficient 30
2001-02
70
90% or more proficient 40
83
88 90
71
60
50
90
78
70
90% or more proficient Percentage of Student Population
100
54 55
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
20
Tlingit1!Program
< 20 Students
2!
District
District
335-351-379-318-340-319
-320-336-337-329
62
3! District
AK Native,
87-75-80-77-76-56-68-73-80-74
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
ATTACHMENT 7
COMPARATIVE CHARTS OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE: SBA TEST
Juneau School District
Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program 2000-2010
Elementary Level: Harborview School
3rd Grade Benchmark Testing (2002-04)
3rd Grade Standards Based Assessment (2004-10)
READING
Percentage of Student Population
100
2002-03
90
80
78
77
78
67
70
60
77 77
2004-05
65
63
53
2003-04
82 80 80
81 81
78
69
2005-06
66
65 65
58
64
57
50
50
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
40
30
25
20
10
0
Tlingit Program
1!
N=
District
2!
AK Native,
3! District
390-350-366-374-342-356-343-365
< 20 Students
92-84-81-72-84-80-65-56
WRITING
2002-03
Percentage of Student Population
100
2003-04
2004-05
90
78
80
2005-06
2006-07
63
59 60
56
60
40
73
77 76
67
70
50
75
75
78 79
54
50
46
38
63
57
2007-08
55 57
46 45
33
30
20
10
0
N=
Tlingit 1!
Program
< 20 Students
2!
District
AK Native,3!District
390-350-366-374-340-356-342-364
63
92-84-81-72-75-80-65-56
2008-09
2009-10
Tens Years Later
Juneau School District
Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program 2000-2010
Elementary Level: Harborview School
4th Grade Standards Based Assessment (2004-10)
READING
Percentage of Student Population
100
88
90
80
80
71
70
79
75
84
84
87
79
2004-05
80
70
67
75
66
74
2005-06
2006-07
67
2007-08
56
60
2008-09
2009-10
50
38
40
30
20
10
0
Tlingit 1!
Program
N=
< 20 Students
District
2!
AK Native,
3! District
364-359-356-341-350-356
97-80-73-73-80-57
WRITING
2004-05
90
90
88
79
80
71
70
84
84
2005-06
86
79 80 67
77 66
64
68
60
50
38
40
30
20
10
0
N=
Tlingit1!Program
< 20 Students
2!
District
364-359-351-341-350-354
64
2006-07
72
2007-08
2008-09
58
90% or more proficient Percentage of Student Population
100
3! District
AK Native,
97-80-72-73-79-57
2009-10
A History of the Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program in the Juneau School District
Juneau School District
Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program 2000-2010
Elementary Level: Harborview School
5th Grade Standards Based Assessment (2004-10)
READING
Percentage of Student Population
100
90
82
79
80
70
82
64
83
86
82
2004-05
85 85!
77
71
70 70!
70
75!
65
68
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
60
50
2009-10
45
40
30
20
10
0
N=
Tlingit Program
1!
District
2!
< 20 Students
AK Native,
3!District
393-364-353-366-337-359
80-95-71-75-82-72
WRITING
2004-05
Percentage of Student Population
100
90
80
2005-06
82
79
82
80
81
80
80
81
77!
70
70
60
60!
55
2006-07
71
2007-08
69
59
50
40
30
20
10
0
N=
Tlingit1!Program
< 20 Students
2!
District
393-364-352-366-339-358
65
2008-09
66
59
3! District
AK Native,
80-95-71-75-82-72
58!
2009-10
Tens Years Later
Terra Nova Norm Referenced Test 2004 - 2009
Stopped grade 4 in 2004 (Year Four), mandatory in grades
5 and 7, through 2009 (Year Nine). In 2009 the District
obtained a DEED waiver to to replace the Terra Nova with
MAP testing (Measuring Academic Progress, administered
three times/year)
Subtests of reading (tests word meanings, and words
in context), vocabulary, and language mechanics (includes
sentences, phrases, clauses and writing conventions) were
given particular attention as teachers reviewed student data.
Juneau School District
Tlingit Culture, Language and Literacy Program 2000-2010
Elementary Level
Terra Nova Test
4th Grade (2003-04)
5th Grade (2004-10)
READING
2003-04
2004-05
Percentage of Student Population
100!
2005-06
90!
80!
70!
64
57!
60!
78 76!
70!
55!
50!
2006-07
80! 79!
60!
64!
65 66!
2007-08
69!
2008-09
2009-10
57!
50!
50!
45!
36!
40!
25!
30!
20!
10!
0!
0!
N=
Tlingit Program
1!
0!
AK Native, 3!
District
District
2!
393-387-349-349-352
< 20 Students
92-80-93-70-65
WRITING
2002-03
2004-05
100!
Percentage of Student Population
90!
79
80!
71 71!
70!
60!
2005-06
2006-07
70!
50!
50!
82! 82!
85!
55!
69
60!
68
74!
68!
2007-08
2008-09
64!
58
50!
50!
45
40!
30!
20!
10!
0!
0!
1!
N=
2!
0!
3!
Tlingit Program
District
AK Native, District
< 20 Students
393-387-349-349-351
92-80-93-70-65
66
2009-10