NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

VOLUME 35, NUMBERS 1, 2, & 3, 2017-2018

EXPLORING AMERICAN INDIAN

STUDENTS EXPERIENCES WITH
INJUSTICE: A NARRATIVE DIALOGIC
APPROACH TO IMPROVE LEADERSHIP
PREPARATION FOR EQUITABLE
SECONDARY SCHOOLS

Hollie J. Mackey
University of Oklahoma
________________________________________________________
Abstract

This qualitative study examines American Indian students experiences with injustice
in the school setting. This study contributes to the literature about leadership
preparation by suggesting the process of critical self-reflection is strengthened by
engaging aspiring leaders to consider student learning from student viewpoints
embedded in a nested social and political system. Understanding these experiences
provides educational leadership scholars and practitioners the opportunity to
interrogate notions of student engagement, belonging, intersectionality, and expand
how we traditionally understand defining the context of schools through students
perspectives; issues often left unaddressed in leadership preparation programs.
Findings underscore school leaders who are concerned with student learning
understand the imperative to strive for equitable conditions for disenfranchised
populations, however may not fully grasp what is needed. Recommendations include
incorporating students intersectional lived experiences into decision-making to support
diversity and equity initiatives intended to improve educational outcomes.
Keywords: American Indian education, student voice, educational
leadership preparation, injustice

47
48 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Introduction

Boske (2012) writes, People are storytelling organisms who,

individually and collectively, lead storied lives; therefore, our ways of
knowing and responding to the world are essential to the ways people
think and learn (pp. 183-184). As Boske theorized, aspiring school
leaders must first engage in a connective process of critical self-
reflection in preparation for engaging in transformative leadership that
dismantles oppressive, systemic practices in schools. Despite Boskes
theory, leadership preparation remains largely reduced to discrete
activities that fit neatly into proscribed standards for building and
district level certification in most leadership preparation programs
(Leithwood & Sun, 2012). Further, educational institutions
fundamentally adhere to an adult-centered paradigm guided by
traditional notions of leadership and followership contrary to decades
of scholarship refuting the effectiveness of this model (Lambert,
Zimmerman, & Gardner, 2016).

School leaders who are concerned with student learning

understand the imperative to strive for equitable conditions for
disenfranchised populations, however may not fully grasp what is
needed. Drawing on Fine and Sirins conceptual framework theorizing
hyphenated selves, this research builds on Boskes work by adding in
an additional reflexive component to aspiring leaders critical self-
reflection that requires understanding students perspectives in matters
relating to students identities and worldviews (2007) and contend
intersectionality should be viewed as a normative paradigm (Hancock,
2007) rather than a content specialization. Conceptualizing
intersectionality as a normative paradigm mitigates identity politics,
reducing competition for scarce resources amongst equally under-
resourced groups, thereby dismantling oppressive systemic practice
which often essentializes equity to a zero-sum game. Practically, one
cannot privilege a single aspect of ones identity to another for
political expediencys sake (Hancock, 2007, p. 65). Through this
construct, we can derive a more complex understanding of how youth
make meaning, speak back, incorporate, and resist the contradictory
 MACKEY 49

messages that swirl through them (Fine & Sirin, 2007, p. 17) while
resisting hegemonic understandings and representations of
underserved and marginalized populations (Ravitch & Riggan, 2011,
p. 57).

Student Contribution to Leadership Preparation

This article looks to American Indian students experiences

with injustice within the school setting from the students perspectives
to help foster understanding of their ways of knowing and responding.
This research contributes to the literature about leadership preparation
program improvement because it adds a new dynamic to the process of
critical self-reflection by asking aspiring leaders to consider student
learning from viewpoints embedded in a nested social and political
system. Understanding these experiences provides us the opportunity
to interrogate notions of student engagement, belonging,
intersectionality, and expand how we traditionally understand defining
the context of schools through students perspectives; issues often
left unaddressed in leadership preparation programs (Shields, 2004).
Additionally, examining the nuances of students experiences, how
they respond (or do not respond) to occurrences of injustice, and how
they view the role of leadership in addressing tensions found between
mainstream normative culture and their own provides insight into
ways in which school leaders might conceptualize holistic,
transformative, comprehensive interventions in schools (Boske, 2012).
Further, this article deeply examines students reflexive intersectional
thoughts about identity as they create portraits of self related to
students perceptions about how school leaders both see and respond
to them, resulting in recommendations for strengthening leadership
aimed at improving the school experience for these marginalized
students.

Stories of students form the foundation for this arts-based

education research article. They are intended to suggest new ways of
viewing education phenomena [and] broaden and deepen ongoing
conversation about educational policy and practice by calling attention
50 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

to seemingly common-sensical, taken-for-granted notions (Barone &

Eisner, 1997, p. 96).This article will begin with a review of the
literature, followed by a description of the research method, analysis,
and findings. The article concludes with a discussion about how
leadership preparation programs could use an arts-based narrative
dialogic approach through a structured, connective process of critical
self-reflection, to create a space for developing leaders who foster
socially just schools in both theory and practice.

Literature Review

American schools remain focused on the academic side of

student learning despite the growing body of empirical evidence
supporting the need for school leaders to shift their attention to
students equally important social and emotional needs (Corrigan,
Higgins-DAllesandro, & Brown, 2013; Mackey, 2012; Weinstock,
Assor, & Broide, 2009). Students belonging to underrepresented
populations often find themselves at the margins of the school
experience where neither their cultures are acknowledged (Shields,
2004), nor their intersectional experiences (e g. gender, class, sexual
orientation) are understood (Hancock, 2007), leading to lower
academic achievement, increased drop-out rates, increased behavior
problems, and limited engagement in their schooling (McMahon &
Portelli, 2004).Student engagement is a critical component for
academic success (Aveling, 2012; Epstein, 1992; Mackey 2012) yet
few leadership preparation programs focus on learner-centered
leadership as a strategy for providing school leaders the tools required
and space needed to address the complex social, cultural, and
economic contexts of schooling (Danzig & Kiltz, 2014; Murphy &
Louis, 1999).

Leadership Preparation

Shifting political landscapes and evolving pedagogical

movements have become normative features shaping educational
 MACKEY 51

leadership. The reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary

Education Act in 2015, titled the Every Student Succeeds Act,
devolved substantial authority wielded by the federal government
since the 2002 reauthorization back to state governments, requiring
state-, district-, and school-level leaders to make adjustments for the
changes when some states waivers for the previous reauthorization
had only recently been approved. Similarly, educational leadership
programs have transitioned by restructuring curriculum and program
design to align with these policies instructional leadership and
accountability demands (Brooks & Miles, 2008; Militello, Fusarelli,
Mattingly, & Warren, 2015) while concomitantly developing
innovative methods of delivery to meet students needs and meet
revised national educational leadership standards that increasingly
reflect a social justice values framework (Mackey, 2015; McCarthy,
Shelton, & Murphy, 2016).

School leaders face competing demands daily. They are

responsible for improving academic achievement, delivering high
quality instructional leadership, developing and sustaining positive
school culture, managing facilities and budgets, performing teachers
evaluation, cultivating strong relationships between the school and
community, and meeting the diverse needs of all families within their
schools. Increasingly, the profession calls for greater attention to
leadership for social justice (Brooks & Miles, 2008; DeMatthews,
2016; Shields, 2004) rooted in principles of democracy (Bogotch,
2014; Gross, 2008) that addresses issues of inequity related to race,
class, gender, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, and other
categories of otherness (Hancock, 2007; Mackey, 2015). Curriculum
inclusive of social justice, democracy, and context-based
transformative organizational change is largely dependent on
individual faculty prerogative, and the degree to which theory is linked
to practice in these content areas is unclear (Darling-Hammond,
LaPointe, Meyerson, Orr, & Cohen, 2007).

School leadership has been identified as a key factor in student

achievement (Darling-Hammond et al., 2007; Klar & Brewer, 2013;
52 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Militello et al., 2015), however despite widespread agreement among

scholars that school leadership is influenced by context, relatively little
research has focused on this critical aspect of leadership practice
(Klar & Brewer, 2013, p. 770). Understanding context is paramount to
adapting core practices central to successful school leadership
(Leithwood, 2007), but context is an ambiguous word which should
give rise to questions such as, who is defining the context? What lens
is being used? Which data are being analyzed? Which policies are
influencing priorities? Students voices are often absent from
discussions defining the context of the school setting, and even fewer
students are invited to collaborate as equals in finding solutions to
complex, context-based problems (Mitra, 2005; Mitra, Serriere, &
Stoicovy, 2012).

Pathologies of Silence

Shields (2004) contends educators are increasingly aware

that despite numerous well intentioned restructuring, reform, and
curricular efforts, many children who are in some way different from
the previously dominant and traditionally most successful White
middle-class children are not achieving school success (p. 111). She
argues the role of educational leadership is to facilitate moral dialogue
that interrogates structural and relational barriers to students success,
specifically focusing on structural inequality and deficit theory
translated into practice within the school setting. Shields asserts that
despite best intentions, educators unknowingly allocate blame for
poor school performance to children from minoritized groups based on
generalizations, labels, or misguided assumptions [from] socially
constructed and stereotypical images (2004, p. 111). In these
contexts, students are not expected to perform well academically, and
it is accepted as an unfortunate condition over which educators have
no control.

Policy-makers, educators, and other educational stakeholders

have crafted a narrative based on assumptions that pathologize
students whose demographic characteristics are not aligned with
 MACKEY 53

students typically achieving success in school. Shields (2004) argues

that educational leaders have the responsibility to engage in dialogue
which challenges this narrative to create learning environments that
are authentically inclusive of the lived experiences of all students.
According to her, school leaders are fully aware of the broad range of
cultures, family structures, socio-economic conditions, and other
characteristics of their students lives that are very different from
those commonly depicted, valued, and validated in our schools (p.
118). Rather than remain silent, school leaders should interrogate the
ways in which our schools can better value and validate students from
multiple divergent backgrounds and lived experiences (Greene, 1993).
Shields frames systemic silence, or pathologies of silence, as a key
barrier to students success, defining these as misguided attempts to
act justly, to display empathy, and to create democratic and optimistic
educational communities (2004, p. 117) through surface-level
acknowledgement and affirmation of differences without attention to
correcting imbalances in power, control, and inequity. She notes
educators often find it difficult to acknowledge difference because
we have not learned to distinguish between recognizing difference in
legitimate ways and using a single characteristic or factor as a way of
labeling and consequently of essentializing others (p. 117).

Addressing Difference and Injustice

Noted diversity and inclusion scholar Maxine Greene

transparently situates her work in response to injustice, stating my
interest in coping with diversity and striving toward significant
inclusion derives to a large degree from an awareness of the savagery,
the brutal marginalizations, the structured silences, the imposed
invisibility so present all around (1993, p. 211). Gorski (2016b)
shares that many, although not all educators and scholars who have
embraced or helped to construct the cultural proficiency framework
have grounded their conceptions of it in commitments to creating more
equitable, more racially and otherwise just, schools (p. 221).
Scholarship under key phrases such as diversity and inclusion,
multicultural education, culturally responsive pedagogy, culturally
54 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

proficient schools, and culturally sustaining pedagogy has increasingly

become more sophisticated and the relationships between the terms,
and how the terms are conceptualized and applied in practice,
increasingly examined from multiple lenses. School leaders address
diversity and multiculturalism within schools through curriculum,
social/emotional programs, staff professional development, community
outreach, and various other means, however these strategies position
difference as an additive feature and neglect systemic injustices and
marginalization (see Banks & McGee Banks, 2010; Gorski, 2016b;
Greene, 1993; Ladson-Billings, 2014; Nieto & Bode, 1992).

There are inherent problems at the foundation of frameworks

currently implemented for the purpose of creating more socially just
schools. These frameworks largely pathologize socially and politically
contentious facets of difference (Shields, 2004), causing them to be
repressed, to become matters of shame rather than pride (Greene,
1993, p. 212) while celebrating aspects of difference that are not
threatening to the power and privilege dynamics of the dominant
culture. Greene reminds us to think of [Kants] admonition (which
most of us would say we believe in absolutely) that all persons should
be treated as ends, never as means, and what that obligation entails
(1993, p. 211). Placing students, and as a natural extension, student
learning, at the center of leadership practice requires school leaders to
do more than establish a Gay/Straight Alliance club or host a
multicultural fair. Gorski notes,

There is nothing inherently wrong about a school hosting a

multicultural fair so long as students complex and
intersectional identities are not reduced to a song and dance
In the same way, certainly cultural sensitivity is an important
element in a more robust approach to educational equity as
long as we embrace the whole selves of all students rather than
assigning them to cultural groups based on single dimensions
of their identities what ought to alarm anybody
committed to the educational rights of racially, linguistically,
economically, or otherwise marginalized studentsis there is
 MACKEY 55

their endorsement of these cultural initiatives as a response to

inequity and injustice. (2016b, p. 222)

Responding to inequity and injustice requires us to acknowledge they

exist. A. W. Astin and Astin (2000) assert leadership values are
reflected, first and foremost, in the ends toward which any leadership
effort is directed (p. 11). School leaders who treat students as ends
engage in activities that accompany the value ends of leadership,
including enhancing equity, social justice, and quality of lifeand
promot[ing] cultural enrichment, creative expression, intellectual
honesty, advancement of knowledge, and personal freedom coupled
with social responsibility (A. W. Astin & Astin, p. 11). It is easy to
recognize school leaders and educators who value diversity and strive
to implement programs which improve awareness, seek to bridge
cultural divides, and promote inclusion of students and families from
diverse backgrounds, however few have the complex understanding
of bias and inequity that allows [them] to make sense of diversity-
related dynamics in sophisticated ways (Gorski, 2016a, p. 13).
Students are invited to participate in activities that celebrate things
which make them different, but little is done to address the ways in
which they feel marginalized in school. Similarly, students
experience, see, and notice their invisibility in the curriculum, the day-
to-day micro-aggressions towards themselves and others, and the lack
of dialogue about the real effects of inequity in a space where they are
told injustice will not be tolerated. Hence, as Shields (2004, p. 115)
asserts, An educational orientation to social justice and democratic
community requires pedagogy forged with, not for, students to permit
them to develop meaningful and socially constructed understandings.

School leaders need the tools to will help them develop a more
sophisticated understanding of how to lead for social justice in a way
that is responsive to inequity and injustice. Part of this is
understanding the ways students perceive inequity and injustice within
the school setting. However, students voices are rarely meaningfully
included in matters of school reform efforts (Mitra, 2005), and fear of
retaliation or inaction on the part of school leaders often prevent them
56 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

from reporting acts of injustice committed against them (Mackey,

2012). One approach to improving marginalized students engagement
and informing leadership preparation for socially just outcomes
includes tapping in to these students creative sensibilities in a way
which allows them to explore their thoughts and make meaning of
their experiences. Using the arts to express recollections about feelings
and events is a strategy that has been used extensively in counseling
and psychology because it provides students the opportunity to
convey multiple layers of meaning in a form that is typically non-
threatening (Barone & Eisner, 1997). Educational leadership scholars
can use similar methods to seek out students perceptions about their
experiences within schools to better inform leadership preparation that
is inclusive of the lived realities students face.

Context of the Study: American Indian Identity

Calderon-Almendros and Habegger-Lardoeyt (2017) explored

the ways students sense of culture and identity are often reconstructed
in schools. As social institutions, schools normalize sorting,
categorizing and labeling as part of the traditional model of education.
Many times, this goes unnoticed by the most ardent social justice
leaders. For example, asking very young students to form a boys line
and a girls line before leaving the classroom has implications for
students understanding of gender identity.

Similarly, not responding to a few students cartoonish

imitations of American Indian powwow songs and dances down the
halls of a high school after a cultural celebration assembly says more
to American Indian students about how school leaders value their
culture than the assembly does. Students receive messages about
where they belong based on placement through academic tests, others
observations, and the ways others respond to them, then construct
ideas of self-worth accordingly.
 MACKEY 57

American Indian students identity is further externally

conflicted by socially imposed stereotypes that assume contemporary
tribal people dress, talk, and live as they did in the late 1800s
(Reyhner & Eder, 2002), that they are incapable of taking care of
themselves and must rely on government handouts (Mackey, 2015), or
conversely, that they do not have to work because they are all
provided excessive government benefits including free universal
healthcare and higher education. Legalized tribal gaming and Indian
casinos are erroneously perceived as under-regulated sources of free
cash that is easily available to all tribal members to use as they choose
despite extensive federal regulation, oversight, and restrictions on the
use of gaming money (Rand & Light, 2006).

American Indian identity is convoluted by their liminality as

both legal/political and racialized beings [and] the experience of
colonization (Brayboy, 2005, p. 429). Tribal nations exist in a space
where on one hand, the majority are recognized through the U.S.
Constitution as sovereign nations, while on the other, extended the
authority of wards of the state through U.S. Supreme Court case law
and federal legislation (Mackey, 2015).

Others are recognized as intact tribal nations by the state while

others are still fighting for state or federal recognition. Further, while
American Indian is a racial classification, it is also a political
classification because each tribe has the authority to determine the
criteria by which a person becomes a tribal member.

Through these constructs, it is possible to be fully racially

American Indian but not legally recognized as such if the person in
question is not a member of a federally recognized tribe. It is also
possible to belong to a federally recognized tribe and have all legal
rights afforded all other tribal members and not be racially American
Indian. These products of colonization are not only confusing, but
create unnecessary conflict and misunderstanding both between
American Indians and the dominant society, and in and among tribes.
58 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

There are currently 566 federally recognized tribes across the

United States, each with its own customs and traditions (Mackey,
2015; Mihesuah, 2003). These tribal groups are often essentialized (or
stereotyped) into one group despite differences so vast, combining
them would be akin to combining people from Norway, Bulgaria, and
Italy and claiming they are one people.

Vast differences exist within tribes as well. Some tribal

members are very traditional and some are very progressive and which
is more valued varies across tribes. Many American Indian students
are raised with a clear understanding of their heritage with others are
raised with no knowledge at all, however classifying someone as more
or less Indian is problematic (Mihesueh, 2003). Students navigate a
complex inner world when trying to make sense of where they fit into
the broader context of being American Indian, yet it is merely one
piece of who they are.

Schools serving large numbers of American Indian students are

eligible for federal funding through Title VI of the Every Student
Succeeds Act to support cultural programming to meet the unique
needs of these students, but once again, this categorizes them into a
discrete bin ignoring their intersectional existence. Cultural programs
alone do not improve educational outcomes for American Indian
students. Powers (2006) found that school climate, defined as school
personnel supportiveness and safe, drug-free schools had the largest
effect size on educational outcomes for urban American Indian
students and personnel supportiveness was the major contributing
factor to participants perceptions about their schools climate, which
in turn had the largest effect on students educational outcomes (p. 44).

Positioning the Author

I conceptualized this study with the understanding that my

credibility and access to participants was predicated on being an
enrolled member of a federally recognized tribe and former teacher in
schools serving predominantly American Indian students. I sought to
 MACKEY 59

design a study around questions that had practical utility and could
directly benefit the participants. Indigenous scholars and others who
situate their work in a postcolonial theoretical context have long
questioned the utility in conducting research or publishing additional
historical or creative work about Indigenous peoples experiences,
cultures, histories, and beliefs (Mihesuah, 2003; Smith, 2012; Young,
2003).

Prior to the 1960s, the bulk of writing about Indigenous

peoples was authored by non-Indigenous people. As Smith explains,
the perception still held by many indigenous communities [is] that
research has been a process that exploits indigenous communities.
something that is done to people by outsiders and from which there is
no apparent positive outcome (2012, p. xi). There are now far more
Indigenous scholars conducting research than ever before, yet not all
scholarship creates the conditions for empowerment. Some writing has
been used for entertainment purposes or to further the careers of
authors (Mihesuah (2003), some of whom falsely claim Indigenous
heritage (Springwood, 2004; Weaver, 1997).

Further, diverging viewpoints and wide ranging opinions held

by American Indigene scholars on matters of tribal identity,
sovereignty, nation building, and both the historical and future
contexts of American Indigenous peoples have generated more
questions than they have settled about Indigenous communities
(Mihesuah, 2003). This highlights the myriad differences found across
American Indian people often categorized as a homogenous racial
group. Despite the different viewpoints, developing an understanding
of American Indian students experiences with injustice within the
school setting as they understand the concept, and translating those
experiences into knowledge useful for improving school leadership
and leadership preparation programs in general, is intended to generate
clear positive outcomes which are tangible and communicated back to
the students through words and actions within their classrooms.
60 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Methodology

This study examined two broad questions: 1) How do

American Indian students perceive and respond to injustice in the
school setting, if at all; and 2) How do American Indian students
perceive school leadership understands and responds to injustice
directed towards them, if at all? I utilized an arts-based education
research approach. This was the appropriate methodology for the study
because it focuses on educational research associated with artistic
activity and is meant to enhance perspectives pertaining to certain
human activities (Barone & Eisner, 1997, p. 95).

Participants included 36 American Indian students ranging

from 14 18 years-old enrolled in a Southwestern suburban school
district. Data collected for this study consisted primarily of written
narrative responses, digital images, and dialogue from focus group
discussion. Students narrative responses were guided by questions
and statements including: How does school leadership acknowledge
American Indian culture or demonstrate an understanding of your
experiences as a modern American Indian youth? How do you
believe school leadership views your concerns as they relate to
sustaining culture while striving for academic success? Describe
injustice as you have experienced it and share how you responded (or
how you wish you had responded), and; Write a short story, poem,
or narrative that describes you, then write a second that describes how
you believe your teachers and principals would describe you.
Students were asked to take digital pictures of scenes or images in the
school setting that represented metaphors of injustice and
leadership for focus group discussion.

Analysis consisted of manually assigning qualitative codes to

written narratives and transcribed focus group discussions. These were
then organized and categorized into thematic hierarchies for content
analysis (Creswell, 2013; Miles & Huberman, 1994; Saldana, 2016). I
compared themes against my researcher notes from the discussion
groups and conducted member checks with some participants to
 MACKEY 61

ensure I was conveying their meaning correctly (Creswell, 2013). I

used quotes from participants where they supported the themes as
evidentiary examples.

This study presents limitations because it represents the

viewpoints of a small number of students within the context of one
bounded suburban school district. This does not, however, take away
from the primary assertions that 1) schools do not meet the complex
needs of students required to facilitate student learning; 2) students are
best situated to express their experiences and inform practice related to
addressing injustices directed towards them, and; 3) traditional
hierarchical power structures in schools require alternative means of
gaining understanding of students experiences.

Findings

Complex Identities

The most common theme throughout the students narratives

was the issue of intersectional identity or multiple interests of varying
degree. On the most basic level, students expressed frustration that
they were viewed only as American Indian students despite their
participation in a wide range of school and community activities that
were not connected to their cultural identities. Students shared feelings
of invisibility outside activities with other American Indian students.
Students wrote:

I asked this one principal about National Honor Society and

she told me not to worry about it because they had Indian
Honor Society for my people. I was like, what? What do you
mean my people, like, AP students? Thats messed up, I mean,
like, really.

We go on all these college visits so we know to go to college

and all. So when we go, all we do is Native American Studies
62 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

stuff. I dont want to go to college for that, but I asked if we

could talk to someone besides Indian professors, like business
or something, but they said no. Its still fun to go, but its not
like the other kids college visits.

One student submitted a digital picture she took of a still frame

from the Walt Disney movie Pocahontas and with the caption, Me
in U.S. History Class. She shared that she endures endless jokes
about being Pocahontas any time lessons involve American Indian
history. Another submitted a digital image of famous Lakota Chief
Sitting Bull and described a teacher calling him Chief when he
walked into class each day. Other students had the opposite, yet
equally frustrating, issue by not having the phenotypical
characteristics that made them immediately identifiable as American
Indian. In a narrative response about an incident with a teacher, a
student wrote:

He got away with it because the pale, blond-haired kid who has
Native American heritage couldnt speak up. I dont look the
part, and no one else in the room did, so he must have assumed
no one would care, and almost no one did. Thats the worst
part in my eyes; no one cared except the one Native American
almost-Arian.

Students narratives addressed more complex issues of intersectionality

as they relate to the school, primarily socio-economic status and
gender identity. Several referenced making sense of comments about
getting free lunch or free school supplies along with comments
from students and teachers about free government money and
getting college paid for. Students wrote:

I get so sick of hearing oh, did you get your Indian check, is
that why you are eating out for lunch today? I have a job! I
dont get nothing free, Im saving my money for a car, just
because Im Indian, of course they think I get a check.
 MACKEY 63

Weve been getting school supplies from [the Indian education

director] my whole life. I dont know who pays for them but
its not like I can say hey mom no I wont write with that
free Indian pencil.

I thought coming out of the closet would be weird, like, I

watched other people get bullied and harassed. Teachers
treated them different and gave them the look. After I came
out, I had a teacher no shit tell me I must be revered by my
people being two spirit and I was like, seriously? I want the
look!

Other students identify very little or do not identify at all with their
American Indian heritage and discussed frustration at being held
responsible for speaking up when occurrences of injustice happen.
Some students refused to participate in this study for this reason.
During a discussion, one student shared his reaction to an incident at
school which will be discussed in the following section. He shared his
discomfort with being the student who the principal felt he had to
make eye contact with while apologizing to a class for an
administrative oversight in approving a class initiative that, while
caught before implemented, had already caused hurt within the
American Indian school community. He thought his class would blame
him for part of their project being cancelled when he had nothing to do
with the cancellation. The student felt the principals attempt at
correcting the oversight and personalizing the apology only reinforced
the differences between students in a negative way.

Perception and Response to Injustice

Students were asked how they perceive and respond to bias,

particularly injustice, if they respond at all. Students perceived that
they experienced injustices or witnessed injustice daily. Their
perceptions were not limited to injustice towards American Indian
identity, further reinforcing their own understanding of themselves as
intersectional beings. They also tended to write about larger issues that
64 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

had broader implications rather than acts against individuals. One

student expressed:

Nobody thinks about things here, like we are invisible. For

example, we were painting banners getting ready for [an
important] football game and this girl is like, I have an idea,
lets do one that says MASSACRE THE INDIANS, and Im
like, um, no. Then she was mad and wanted and explanation,
and my teacher thought it was a good time to discuss mascots,
but she doesnt know much about the issue. So we did not
make the banner, but everyone was mad at me for a month.
And if I was not part Indian I would still say its a bad idea so I
dont know what everyone is mad about. Anyway, we go to the
game, and of course, the other team comes running out of a tipi
with smoke coming out of it and the same girl got mad again
and said, see, if they can do it, why cant we?

Students submitted digital pictures of students in their school wearing

athletic logos with American Indian mascots, popular clothing that had
culturally appropriated elements incorporated, and posters from
classrooms and hallways that they felt depicted American Indian
culture in a uni-dimensional or unjust manner.

The students who responded to injustice tended to do so though

logo t-shirts and protest buttons, submitting pictures of students
wearing clothing and items supporting the North Dakota Pipeline
Protest, American Indian Movement, and the No Plains Pipeline
Protest. Others submitted images that displayed individual tribal
affiliations or Water is Life written out across notebooks or in one
instance, a tribal emblem was drawn like a tattoo on a students hand
and wrist.

Several discussed remaining silent for fear of singling

themselves out after special tribal guest speakers were brought in or
American Indian celebration-type events were held where they felt
other students were disrespectful. Students also wrote about every-day
 MACKEY 65

discussions within classrooms where they felt helpless to address

injustice, for example:

I was sitting in my high school Physics class waiting for

passing period to end. It was our schools Native American
heritage month, and to celebrate in the last minute of passing
period instead of regular music tribal ceremony music was
played. This already was not turning out as planned since a
large portion of the students at school were just mocking the
songs when they played. I couldnt tell if they truly were
ignorant of their action or simply wanted to fit in with others
doing the same; high school can be scary, you need back-up.
Anyway, I was sitting there and a student brought up the
Dakota Pipeline by saying, Did you hear about those rioters in
North Dakota or something? The police need to just hose them
with water. Thatll clear em out, then laughed along with his
friends. I looked around and no one was caring, no one gave a
care in the world about this awful thing that was just said.
Before I had the chance to feel pity, or anger, or fear of the
future world where this is the social norm (Trust me, all 3 were
felt later) my teacher chimed in on the subject. His words
werent what I expected of a teacher, maybe something along
the lines of Thats not school appropriate or Thats not very
polite or really anything that would dissolve the situation he
said No, what they need to do is set up huge speakers on a hill
and blare annoying sounds all day to drive them out and
laughed with the students. I was more shell-shocked than
anything, and just looked at the teacher. Pain, anger, confusion,
those all came after the simple question of why? Why is he
saying this? Why cant I speak and stand up for my heritage?
Why is this level of disregard possible in a man who can easily
manipulate young minds? I already knew that teens in high
school are mostly just self-centered and I know that teachers
can be awful to students in general but this was a new level. I
said nothing to either of them, nothing to defend my bloodline
and help shed light on the issue. I still dont know why. Fear
66 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

most likely, I know what being alone in High School is like,

the outcasts never last.

The fear students expressed was not related to their American Indian
identity, rather, it appeared to stem from the need to belong and the
fear of isolation felt by this age group in general. Examples where
students wrote about responding to injustice included situations where
they were in a small group of trusted friends or when there was a
larger number of American Indian students present to back each other
up. Students spoke of spaces within the school in a geo-political
context, for example, some areas were theirs, others were neutral
or cool, while some they did not go into because they belonged to
other, presumably non-friendly, peers. One student referred to
classrooms and passing period as the war zone where anything could
happen.

Leadership: Understanding and Responding to Injustice

Students responses to the ways they felt school leadership

understands and responds to injustices towards them was relatively
universal. Students discussed programs in the school such as the
Indian tutoring program, the Native American Club, and the Indian
Education Program that provided access to cultural and academic
activities that brought them together with other American Indian
students as a positive aspect, but noted that teachers outside these
programs tended to be disrespectful, and at times, openly hostile,
towards their culture. Most students said they preferred participating in
cultural activities outside the school because they didnt have to deal
with non-American Indian students mocking or belittling their
culture. Students narratives shared a common theme that school
leaders were concerned, and cared about including them, but did not
have the time to include aspects of American Indian culture or address
issues of inequity in a meaningful way. In response to statements made
in one classroom, a student wrote:

Im not going to say I was fully attuned to my Native heritage

 MACKEY 67

at the time, or even now, but this level of disregard for outside
culture truly disgusted me. I knew I had to tell someone, and
decided on my mom. A councilor wouldnt do much to help,
and the principal would never be available enough to hear the
full extent of the issue. But my mother who was spiritually
there with our heritage would hear me. All of this and all my
thoughts occurred in a time of less than a minute, and after the
laughter died it wasnt brought up again.

The student from the identity section above shared a similar thought
when his class was planning the themes for spirit week. One of the
groups planned a theme some felt was disrespectful to American
Indian culture, and while he heard the theme and knew it was going to
be a conflict, said nothing. After an email went out to parents with a
list of themes for the following week, some parents brought it to the
principals attention and the principal had to retract the email. The
teacher developed a new theme for that day and a new email went out.
The student said:

I knew someone would think it was a big deal, but [the

principal] is always running around so you cant talk to him
and nobody else cares so why should I? Besides, if I said
something, everyone would just get mad, and nobody listens to
him either. I dont have to be the Indian police, I got Tuesday
and we figured our theme out. I mean, I get blamed if anyone
says anything being the only Indian in the class, but Monday
wasnt in my lane.

Students expressed frustration regarding the adults assumptions they

know what concerns students and what they want to do and learn
about. They specifically cited culture and language curriculum and
activities based on traditional culture, writing that they had broader
interests and wanted to learn about how being American Indian
contributed to other interests rather than feeling as if they were bound
to the program the adults designed. They also felt there was no
response to injustice in general, not just American Indian issues. One
68 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

student shared:

I feel like they have to put up with us [students] because

without us there is no school, but with us, they are all, like, so
put out all the time. We are just supposed to be thankful we get
to be here or something. Kids get picked on all the time or I
hear girls get called terrible names and grabbed, right in front
of teachers and stuff, but they just stand there because [the
principal] makes them stand in the hallway between classes,
but its supposed to be for our safety, not just to stand there and
glare because you have to stand in the hallway.

None of the students wrote about being asked about their concerns or
feelings of marginalization or about their experiences in the school. In
follow up discussion, all the participants agreed the school leaders at
some point said they could come to them if there was a problem or
issue, however of those who had, students said they were told nothing
could be done or the situation ended up worse after the student sought
help.

Discussion

The purpose of this article was to examine American Indian

students experiences with injustice within the school setting from the
students perspectives to better understand how they view efforts to
improve inclusion and equity. The examination informs leadership
preparation by incorporating students perspectives into the existing
literature about student engagement, belonging, and leadership for
social justice. This study extends leadership for social justice by
providing insight into the perceived effectiveness of diversity and
inclusion efforts on the part of school leaders who strive to meet the
needs of diverse communities.

Improving student learning requires attention to the academic

and social/emotional needs of students (Corrigan et al., 2013; Mackey,
2012; Weinstock et al., 2009), however holistic, transformative,
 MACKEY 69

comprehensive interventions in schools that are not designed with the

lived experiences of students from their perspectives in mind are not
likely to succeed. I conceptualized this study around two broad
research questions. They are: 1) How do American Indian students
perceive and respond to injustice in the school setting, if at all; and 2)
How do American Indian students perceive school leadership
understands and responds to injustice directed towards them, if at all?

Student Perceptions and Responses

Participating students wrote about instances of injustice that

stood out as more egregious than everyday occurrences, however they
had no trouble providing multiple examples of micro-aggressions,
teasing comments, and other types of behaviors by students,
teachers, teachers aides, and staff that fit the definition in focus group
discussion. In most instances, the behavior was not directed toward the
student sharing the incident and the student did not respond to the
incident directly. Rather, the student told friends or a parent about it
later or kept it to themselves. Examples of this include watching other
students mock tribal music in the hallways or listening to discussions
in a Physics classroom advocating techniques intended to inflict harm
on American Indian protesters in North Dakota.

In other examples, students shared experiences where teachers

asked them to add the American Indian viewpoint to supplement
curriculum or speak on behalf of all American Indian people about a
current social issue and they felt embarrassed or put on the spot. This
aligns with literature discussing differences in interaction styles
between American Indian students and the dominant culture (Powers,
2006). American Indian students are more likely to remain quiet and
not draw attention to themselves, which teachers often perceive as
lazy, disengaged, or impertinent.

When students responded to injustice, they did so when the

issue already had support from peers who were not American Indian
or they were in a peer group of other American Indian students. Prior
70 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

to the discussion groups, I interpreted this as a phenomenon where

students felt safer when they knew they were not alone in taking a risk.
As the discussion focus groups revealed, this was not the primary
reason, although it could not be fully discounted. In most instances,
the participants expressed they felt adults expected them to be more
historically and socially aware than their peers because of their
cultural heritage when they were regular kids like everyone else.
They did not feel compelled to respond simply because an issue was
characterized as an injustice towards American Indian people, rather,
their general awareness of and action towards injustice were largely
influenced by their peers behavior.

Responding to stereotypes and issues like mascots was easier

because, like all students, they were issues to which they were
familiar. Most felt as though they were invisible, therefore the
behaviors they witnessed had nothing to do with them. This was
different when they were in a larger group of their peers. In these
groups, students shared that discourse between different groups of
students was often deliberately race-based and participants would
respond by defending themselves against verbal insults or taunts.

One more interesting aspect of this was the participants

recognized when marginalizing comments were made about American
Indian people and culture but did not recognize their own use of
marginalizing language about other groups of people until an
intersectional identity line of one of their peers was drawn and they
were corrected from within their peer group. For example, one student
was talking about a hillbilly White kid when he was interrupted by
another student who said, dude, Im half White, to which the first
student sincerely replied, sorry, my bad.

While the students responses illuminate the experiences of

American Indian students, a group largely omitted from the larger
body of educational leadership literature, it is likely other groups of
students share similar narratives of experiencing injustice within the
school setting. There are some aspects that serve as a mirror, reflecting
 MACKEY 71

the progress we have made in helping students develop the skills to

identify and articulate injustice, however others warrant discussion,
particularly the ways the students avoidance of discomfort associated
with confronting injustice appears modeled after school leaderships
similar response (Gorski, 2016a; Shields, 2004).

However, there is a difference between the ways students and

school leaders do not respond to injustice. Thomas (2009) explains
that ignoring is an agentic response from students that minimizes the
pain of marginalization, therefore students protect themselves by not
responding to injustice, as opposed to school leaders, who, as Shields
(2004) informs us, promote optimism but do not address complex
issues of bias and inequity to correct injustices. Further, Thomas
theorized the pressure to conform and solidify peer-group
identification, in part, explains students tendency to marginalize other
students, often reproducing the same categorizations of difference
that pain them (p. 8). These combined paint a bleak picture of the
ways students view diversity and inclusion interventions and school
culture initiatives as school leaders have translated them from theory
to practice.

School Leaders Understanding and Response to Injustice

This study provided positive feedback about students

perceptions that school leaders genuinely cared about trying to make
the school culture more inclusive for students who felt marginalized or
excluded. However, it also provided a bleak picture of the relationship
between students and leaders with students expressing that school
leaders did not understand, or seek to understand, their experiences
with injustice within the school setting.

Socially just, democratic schools cannot exist when the

experiences of the majority of people in the organization are excluded
from consideration. Students are given mixed messages about
behavior. On one hand, they are taught they should be inclusive, not
bully, and intervene rather than remain a bystander when they see
72 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

injustice occur, while on the other, they watch adults act in ways that
contradict those lessons. The students in this study expressed they
would rather not go to a school leader to report an incident because it
would be a waste of time or they would face retaliation (further
injustice) that the school leader would not respond to.

While participants did not like the feelings associated with

being reduced to a racialized outsider group despite having complex
intersectional identities, there was comfort in being surrounded by
others experiencing the same discomfort. This normalizing racial
difference, despite the pain it invokes, is a step that discourage easy
suggestions of embodied agency within the confines of a highly
regulated and invested racial economy of subjectivity (Thomas, 2009,
p. 9). We should seek to better understand students experiences and
they ways in which they grapple with making choice about the
consequences of their agentic actions. School leaders who, while
committed to social justice leadership, experience comfort in
optimistic diversity and inclusion paradigms that do little to respond to
injustice and inequity in the school setting.

Implications for Leadership Preparation

Boske (2012) suggests incorporating an arts-based approach to

leadership preparation helps increase aspiring leaders critical
consciousness, deepens empathetic responses, and shifts their nature of
their social justice leadership from advocacy to activism. Through her
2012 study, she demonstrated a well-designed connective process of
critical self-reflection embedded within leadership preparation
provides the space and time necessary for aspiring leaders to engage
their creative senses and gain a deeper understanding of the
importance of developing meaningful relationships with children,
families, and other members of the school community. She found as
participant deepened their empathetic responses, they increased their
readiness to interrupt oppressive practices on their campuses as well as
within themselves (p. 192). I suggest this activity would be further
 MACKEY 73

strengthened by incorporating students perspectives into the activity

through a similar arts-based approach followed by engaging school
leaders in similar activities centered on what they have learned from
the students.

This narrative dialogic approach creates space for school

leaders to think about student learning from alternative perspectives
and provides them opportunities to explore new ideas and possibilities
for the future. In this way, leadership preparation programs help
aspiring leaders develop positive relationships with students such that
children may bring their own lived experiences into the school and
classroom, and facilitate moral dialogue (Shields, 2004, p. 113).
Further, it shifts the traditionally adult-centered educational leadership
paradigm to a more inclusive collective paradigm that contributes
towards developing greater understanding of social justice informed
school leadership and leadership preparation.

Conclusion

It has been nearly a quarter-century since the 1983, A Nation at

Risk report sparked a national panic in American public education
leading to multiple iterations of systemic reform efforts intended to
improve academic outcomes for all students. In that time, educational
leadership preparation has evolved as our understanding of student
learning and effective leadership has increased, however the structural
and normative features of school remain largely unchanged. Despite
decades of research revealing the myriad complex factors contributing
to academic outcomes, leadership carries the burden of blame for
public educations failure (Lambert et al., 2016). They remind us that
schools and organizations are rich with talented, thoughtful
individuals who, when given the opportunity to work in open,
engaging, and democratic cultures, consistently emerge as leaders and
innovators (2016, p. 1).
74 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Leadership preparation should look for innovative approaches

to equip school leaders for making transforming changes at the
building level while working in within a bureaucracy. How
leadership is defined will determine how, when, and in what ways
people participate (Lambert et al., 2016, p. 1). Just as understanding
how aspiring school leaders know and understand the world supports
learning for leadership, so too does understanding how students know
and understand the world supports student learning.
 MACKEY 75

References

Astin, A. W., & Astin, H. S. (2000). Leadership reconsidered.

Engaging higher education in social change. Retrieved from
http://www.naspa.org/images/uploads/kcs/SLPKC_Learning _
Reconsidered.pdf
Aveling, N. (2012). Indigenous studies: A matter of social justice; a
matter of urgency. Diaspora, Indigenous, and Minority
Education, 6(2), 99-104.
Banks, J. A., & McGee Banks, C. A. (2010). Multicultural education:
Issues and perspectives (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &
Sons.
Barone, T., & Eisner, E. W. (1997). Arts-based educational research.
In R. M. Jaeger (Ed.), Complementary Methods for Research
in Education (2nd ed., pp. 95-109). Washington, DC:
American Educational Research Association.
Bogotch, I. (2014). Educational theory: The specific case of social
justice as an educational leadership construct. In I. Bogotch &
C. M. Shields (Eds.) International handbook of educational
leadership and social (in)justice (pp. 51-65). New York, NY:
Springer.
Boske, C. (2012). Sending forth tiny ripples of hope that build the
mightiest of currents: Understanding how to prepare school
leaders to interrupt oppressive school practices. Planning and
Changing, 43(1/2), 183-197.
Brayboy, B. M. J. (2005). Toward a tribal critical race theory in
education. The Urban Review, 37(5), 425-446.
Brooks, J. S, & Miles, M. T. (2008). From scientific management to
social justice and back again? Pedagogical shifts in the
study and practice in educational leadership. In A. H. Normore
(Ed.), Leadership for social justice: Promoting equity and
excellence through inquiry and reflective practice (pp. 99-
114). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Calderon-Almendros, I., & Habegger-Lardoeyt, S. (2017). Education,
disability, and inclusion: A family struggle against an
excluding school. Boston, MA: Sense.
76 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Corrigan, M. W., Higgins-DAllesandro, A., & Brown, P. M. (2013).

The case for adding prosocial education to current education
policy: Preparing students for the tests of life, not just a life of
tests. Korean Journal of Education Policy, Special Issue, 37-
50.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design:
Choosing among five approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Danzig, A., & Kiltz, G. (2014). Reflections on what was learned in the
U.S. Department of Education funded learner-centered
leadership (LCL) project 2002-2006. In K. Sanzo (Ed.), From
policy to practice: Sustainable innovations in school
leadership preparation development (pp. 71 99). Charlotte,
NC. Information Age.
Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., Meyerson, D., Orr, M. T., &
Cohen, C. (2007). Preparing school leaders for a changing
world: Lessons from exemplary leadership development
programs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford
Educational Leadership Institute.
DeMatthews, D. (2016, August 15). Social justice dilemmas: Evidence
on the successes and shortcomings of three principals trying to
make a difference. International Journal of Leadership in
Education, 1-15. doi: 10.1080/13603124.2016.1206972
Epstein, E. H. (1992). Social paradoxes of American education.
Oxford Review of Education, 18(3), 201-212.
Fine, M., & Sirin, S. R. (2007). Theorizing hyphenated selves:
Researching youth development in and across contentious
political spaces. Social and Personality Psychology Compass,
1(1), 16-38. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00032.x
Gorski, P. (2016a). Equity literacy: More than celebrating diversity.
Diversity in Education, Spring Issue, 12-14.
Gorski, P. (2016b). Rethinking the role of culture in educational
equity: From cultural competency to equity literacy.
Multicultural Perspectives, 18(4), 221-226.
Greene, M. (1993). Diversity and inclusion: Toward a curriculum for
human beings. Teachers College Record, 95(2), 211-221.
 MACKEY 77

Gross, S. J. (2008. (Re)constructing a movement for social justice in

our profession. In A. H. Normore (Ed.), Leadership for social
justice: Promoting equity and excellence through inquiry and
reflective practice (pp. 257-266). Charlotte, NC: Information
Age.
Hancock, A. (2007). Intersectionality as a normative and empirical
paradigm. Politics and Gender, 3(2), 248-254.
Klar, H. W., & Brewer, C. A. (2013). Successful leadership in high-
needs schools: An examination of core leadership practices
enacted in challenging contexts. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 49(5), 768-808. doi: 10.1177/0013161X13482577
Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: A.K.A.
the remix. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 74-84.
Lambert, L., Zimmerman, D. P., & Gardner, M. E. (2016). Liberating
leadership capacity: Pathways to educational wisdom. New
York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Leithwood, K. (2007). What we know about educational leadership. In
J. M. Burger, C. Webber, & P. Klink (Eds.), Intelligent
leadership (pp. 41-66). New York, NY: Springer.
Leithwood, K., & Sun, J. (2012). The nature and effects of
transformational school leadership: A meta-analytic review of
unpublished research. Educational Administration Quarterly,
48(3), 387-423.
Mackey, H. J. (2012). Transformational partnerships: Translating
research into practice through culturally competent evaluation
practices in American Indian communities. International
Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 25(7), 947-963.
Mackey, H. J. (2015). Going against the grain of accountability:
Leadership preparation for using data to promote socially just
outcomes. eJournal of Education Policy, Special Issue, 41-56.
McCarthy, M., Shelton, S., & Murphy, J. (2016). Policy penetration of
the ISLLC standards. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 15(2),
221-230. doi: 10.1080/15700763.2015.1093149
McMahon, B., & Portelli, J. P. (2004). Engagement for what? Beyond
popular discourse of student engagement. Leadership and
Policy in Schools, 3(1), 59-76.
78 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Mihesuah, D. A. (2003). Indigenous American women:

Decolonization, empowerment, activism. Lincoln, NE:
University of Nebraska Press.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis
(2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Militello, M., Fusarelli, B. C., Mattingly, A., & Warren, T. (2015).
We do what were told: How current assistant principals
practice leadership and how they wish they could. Journal of
School Leadership, 25(2), 194-222.
Mitra, D. L. (2005). Advising youth: Leading while getting out of the
way. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(3), 520-553.
Mitra, D., Serriere, S., & Stoicovy, D. (2012). The role of leaders in
enabling student voice. Management in Education, 26(3),
104-112. doi: 10.1177/08920206124445678
Murphy, J., & Louis, K. S. (1999). Handbook of research on
educational administration. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Nieto, S., & Bode, P. (1992). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical
context of multicultural education. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Powers, K. M. (2006). An exploratory study of cultural identity and
culture-based educational programs for urban American Indian
students. Urban Education, 41(1), 20-49.
doi: 10.1177/0042085905282249
Rand, K. R. L., & Light, S. A. (2006). Indian gaming law and policy.
Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
Ravitch, S. M., & Riggan, J. M. (2011). Reason & rigor: How
conceptual frameworks guide research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Reyhner, J., & Eder, J. (2002). American Indian education: A history.
Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.
Saldana, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los
Angeles, CA: Sage.
Shields, C. M. (2004). Dialogic leadership for social justice:
Overcoming pathologies of silence. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 40(1), 109-132.
 MACKEY 79

Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and

indigenous peoples (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Zed Books.
Springwood, C. F. (2004). Im Indian too! Claiming Native
American identity, crafting authority in mascot debates.
Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 28(1), 56-70.
doi: 10.1177/0193732503261477
Thomas, M. E. (2009). The identity politics of school life:
Territoriality and the racial subjectivity of teen girls in LA.
Childrens Geographies, 7(1), 7-19.
doi: 10.1080/14733280802630940
Weaver, J. (1997). That the people might live: Native American
literatures and Native American community. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Weinstock, M., Assor, A., & Broide, G. (2009). Schools as promoters
of moral judgment: The essential role of teachers
encouragement of critical thinking. Social Psychology of
Education, 12(1), 137-151. doi: 10.1007/s11218-008-9068-9
Young, R. J. C. (2003). Postcolonialism: A very short introduction.
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
80 NATIONAL FORUM OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION JOURNAL

Author Bio

Hollie J. Mackey (Northern Cheyenne) is an Associate Professor of

Womens and Gender Studies at the University of Oklahoma. Her
research includes women in educational leadership, American
Indian/Alaska Native education, Title IX and disability law and ethics,
and equity literacy. She is the recipient of the 2013 Willower Award
for Excellence and the 2014 Jack A. Culbertson Award for outstanding
accomplishments as an assistant professor of educational leadership.