Education as a federal tool
For much of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, federal education policy toward Native nations was designed by people outside those nations and aimed at changing them. That is the starting point for understanding how schooling reached Apache communities. It also explains why many Apache nations have worked to take schooling back into their own hands. The story is not identical for every nation, since the timing of reservations, the presence of missionaries and the distance to schools all differed.
Promises and missions
Early federal involvement in Native schooling relied heavily on churches. A law of 1819, often called the Civilization Fund Act, provided federal money that went largely to missionary societies for schools. Treaties with many nations promised teachers or schools as part of the exchange for land. By the time Apache nations were confined to reservations in the 1870s and 1880s, agents, missionaries and the Army were running or sponsoring day schools, often with few teachers and little equipment. Some of these early schools are discussed under early Apache mission and day schools.
The boarding school era
In 1879 the Carlisle Indian Industrial School opened in Pennsylvania, and the model of removing children from their families spread across the country. The reasoning of the time was that distance from family, English-only instruction and training in farming or domestic work would hasten assimilation. A federal assimilation policy, supported by Congress and by reformers, shaped the daily routines of these schools. The effects on Apache families are covered in more detail in the articles on boarding schools in this cluster and elsewhere on the site. For this timeline, the point is that boarding schooling was national policy, not a local decision.
Criticism and reform
By the late 1920s, criticism of the system became public. The Meriam Report of 1928, a study requested by the Interior Department, was highly critical of conditions in boarding schools and of the health and education of Native children, and recommended more community-based schooling and better teacher training. The 1930s brought changes of emphasis. The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 encouraged tribal governments, and the Johnson-O’Malley Act of 1934 allowed the federal government to contract with states and school districts to educate Native children in public schools. Over the following decades more Apache children attended public schools near their reservations, while a smaller number of boarding schools continued to operate.
This was not simply a happier arrangement. Public schools could be far away, could treat Native students poorly and rarely taught Apache languages or history. Conversations about unequal outcomes continue today under the heading of Apache education equity.
The turn to self-determination
A 1969 Senate report on Indian education, often called the Kennedy Report, described the results of earlier policy as a national failure and called for more Native participation. Federal laws that followed shifted the direction:
- The Indian Education Act of 1972 created funding for Native students in public schools and a dedicated federal office.
- The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975 allowed tribes to contract to run programs formerly operated by federal agencies, including schools.
- Later laws supported tribally controlled community colleges and tribally controlled schools, and the Native American Languages Act of 1990 declared it federal policy to support the use and preservation of Native languages.
These changes are often summarized as a move toward Native-controlled schooling. A tribe that runs a school can set its hours, hire its teachers and decide what role language and local history play in the curriculum, although funding and academic standards still come largely from federal and state governments.
Schools on Apache reservations today
Apache reservations today are served by a combination of public school districts, schools funded by the federal Bureau of Indian Education, some of which are run by tribes under grants or contracts, and, in some places, schools run by churches or private organizations. Some nations also work with community colleges or run their own education departments. The balance differs from nation to nation, and the programs offered change frequently. Many nations have prioritized Apache language in schools, with classes for children and sometimes immersion settings, and some support Apache tribal colleges and schools through partnerships or scholarships.
The results are mixed. Tribal control can bring local priorities into the classroom, but it does not erase problems of rural distance, teacher turnover, uneven funding or the lasting effects of earlier policy. Researchers and educators within the nations themselves often note both progress and unfinished work.
Reading current information
Because education programs, grants and school names change, readers should consult the official websites of the Apache nations and of the relevant school districts for current information. This article describes policy in general terms and does not recommend any particular school or program.