Native American studies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Native American studies (also known as American Indian, Indigenous American, Aboriginal, Native, or First Nations studies) is an interdisciplinary academic field that examines the history, culture, politics, issues, and contemporary experience of Native peoples in North America,[1] or, taking a hemispheric approach, the Americas. Increasingly, debate has focused on the differences rather than the similarities between other Ethnic studies disciplines such as African American studies, Asian American Studies, and Latino/a Studies. In particular, the political sovereignty of many indigenous nations marks substantive differences in historical experience from that of other racial and ethnic groups in the United States and Canada. Drawing from numerous disciplines such as anthropology, sociology, history, literature, political science, and gender studies, Native American studies scholars consider a variety of perspectives and employ diverse analytical and methodological tools in their work.[1]

Two key concepts shape Native American studies, according to Crow Creek Lakota scholar Elizabeth Cook-Lynn, indigenousness (as defined in culture, geography, and philosophy) and sovereignty (as legally and historically defined).[2] Practitioners advocate for decolonization of indigenous peoples, political autonomy, and the establishment of a discipline dedicated to alleviating contemporary problems facing indigenous peoples.[1]


The Native historical experience in the Americas is marked by forcible and sometimes willing attempts at assimilation into mainstream European American culture (Americanization). Beginning with missionaries and leading up to federally controlled schools, the aim was to educate American Indians so that they could go back to their communities and facilitate the assimilation process. As cited by David Beck in his article "American Indian Higher Education before 1974: From Colonization to Self-Determination," the schools were used as a tool for assimilation. Their main focus was not intellectual but to give training for industrial jobs or domestic jobs.[1]

The Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s-1960s contested mainstream methods of assimilationist indoctrination and the substance of what was being taught in K-12 schools and universities throughout the United States. American Indian students, coupled with sympathetic professors, assisted in creating new programs with new aims. Rather than being focused on Indians going back to their communities to educate along the lines of assimilation there was a move to educate for empowerment. Programs that did community outreach and focused on student retention in campuses have risen out of that movement. Furthermore, the programs in schools created a new interpretation for American Indian history, sociology, and politics.[1]

During the First Convocation of American Indian Scholars in March 1970 at Princeton University, indigenous scholars drafted a plan to develop "Native American Studies as an Academic Disclipine," which would defend indigenous control of their lands and indigenous rights and would ultimately reform US Indian Policy.[3] This discipline would be informed by traditional indigenous knowledge, especially oral history,[4] and would "defend indigenous nationhood in America."[2]

In direct opposition to Western anthropology, the knowledge base of Native American studies is endogenous, or emerging from within the indigenous communities. Developers of Native American studies widely dismissed the notion of scientific objectivity,[2] since Western cultural biases have historically informed anthropology and other disciplines.

Decolonizing Native American Studies

Linda Tuhiwai Smith is a Professor of Education and Maori Development and Pro-Vice-Chancellor Maori at the University of Waikato in Hamilton, New Zealand. Smith explains the word itself, “research” is linked to European colonialism and that indigenous peoples are very apprehensive and cautious based on these connections, going on to explain that the pursuit of knowledge, or research, is embedded deeply in multiple layers of European and Colonial processes. Colonial definitions and understandings of native peoples were reported to the West and then the West reported those representations were then sent back and attached to indigenous identity. In this way, research is very powerful. Indigenous researchers need to be afforded the opportunity to critique and fine tune these methodologies so that a more accurate representation of their group is assigned. [5] 


Philip Deloria, professor of Native American History at Harvard University, a popularly accepted authority in the field, explores the historiography of Native America History by focusing in on some very important questions. Deloria acknowledges the abundance of work that exists in the canon, and also understands the lack of diversity amongst the authors. Through his examination of the system or organization and possible future inclusions and multiplicities of the field, Deloria leads the reader to the question of epistemology. He highlights the idea of difference insisting that historians must analyze the how non-native writers have viewed the Native Americans as different and how Natives have viewed those assessments. Another major focus of Deloria’s, is on periodization. He provides four broad historical periods in written Native American History. In analyzing the work from Frontiers History, Racial Science, Modernist History and Native Narrative, shifts in historical writing can be identified. He states that, “each suggests changes in social, political, and epistemological positions within non-Indian societies that have helped to produce new kinds of history writing” . All of Deloria’s research brings him to the conclusion that the most interesting new work in the field of Native American History can come from both Native and Non-Native writers, who have fully explored the work of the other side.[6]

Academic journals[edit]


Notable scholars[edit]

See also[edit]



  1. ^ a b c d e Heitshu, Marshall (2009)
  2. ^ a b c Cook-Lynn (1997), p. 11
  3. ^ Cook-Lynn (1997), p. 9
  4. ^ Cook-Lynn (1997), p. 10
  5. ^ Cain, Tiffany (2013-11-25). "Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples, 2nd Edition by Linda Tuhiwai Smith. London and New York: Zed Books, 2012. 240 pp". Anthropology & Education Quarterly. 44 (4): 443–445. doi:10.1111/aeq.12032. ISSN 0161-7761.
  6. ^ Deloria, Philip J.; Salisbury, Neal, eds. (2002-01-01). "A Companion to American Indian History". doi:10.1002/9780470996461. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)


  • Cook-Lynn, Elizabeth (Spring 1997). "Who Stole Native American Studies?". Wíčazo Ša Review. 12 (1): 9–28. JSTOR 1409161.
  • Heitshu, Sara C.; Marshall, Thomas H. (2009). Native American Studies: A Guide to Reference and Information Sources. Social Sciences (2nd revised ed.). Libraries Unlimited, U.S. ISBN 1-56308-971-8.

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]