1. Give students five minutes to write their answers on one topic.

2. Then begin to introduce todayâs topic.
 

 B. Over the next two days, we are going to examine federal Indian policies of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries so that we can better understand how and why Indian Peoples began to actively resist the historical course of federal intervention and fight for self-determination.

 

1. Discussion: What is self-determination?

2. Given what we have already learned about Indian sovereignty, do you think most of todayâs Indian Nations exercise a great deal of self-determination? Since the 1970s, the federal government has gradually, and usually reluctantly, moved toward the path of greater self-determination for American Indians. The discussions over the next two days will help you further understand such efforts, as well as the role Indian activism has played in these endeavors.

 

 

1. You will notice that the timeline begins with the first federal treaty in 1787 and ends in with 1956 Relocation Act. The relationship between American Indian Nations and the federal government does not begin and end with these dates, nor is the information given in the timeline exhaustive.
 

III. The Timeline.

1. Discussion: What do you think this was? Non-Indians wished to move westward and to claim all the land to the Pacific Ocean. Their justification was known as Manifest Destiny. However, their efforts would be impeded along the way as millions of Indian people lived on the land and were not going to voluntarily or willingly give up their homelands.

 

2. Yesterday we discussed one way that the federal government began to deal with the ãIndian problem.ä Does anyone remember what it was? The US Supreme Court limited the exercise of sovereign powers by Indian tribes.

 

3. Today we are going to discuss three specific avenues the federal government took in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries to deal with the ãIndian problem.ä [OVERHEAD - NINETEENTH AND TWENTIETH CENTURY FEDERAL EFFORTS DESIGNED TO ELIMINATE THE ãINDIAN PROBLEM.ä]

 

a. From 1787 through 1886, the federal government relied upon over 370 treaties, several key US Supreme Court decision, and various federal laws, all of which reduced the sovereign powers of Indian Nations and expropriated Indian land and natural resources. In return, the federal government accepted the trust responsibility - the promise to provide Indian Nations who gave up their land with necessary benefits and services.

 b. From 1886 to 1934, the federal government passed laws and executive orders that created new policies which defined the relationship between the federal government and American Indian Peoples. The primary policies - allotment, assimilation, and elimination - resulted in the further loss of Indian land and the genocidal decimation of Indian political, economic, cultural, and spiritual lifestyles and beliefs.

 c. From 1934 to 1956, the federal government used two different avenues to define its relations with American Indians:
 

1) From 1934 to 1953, it passed a series of laws that sought to revitalize Indian cultures, languages, governments, and spiritual practices in a manner that was consistent with non-Indian perceptions about Indians.

2) From 1953 to 1956, it passed a series of laws that focused on terminating the trust relationship between American Indians and the federal government.

 

 

1. Option One - Class Lecture/Discussion: Day One.Our discussion for the next two days will focus on the three specific avenues the federal government took in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries to deal with the ãIndian problem.ä [Refer to again the previous OVERHEAD - NINETEENTH AND TWENTIETH CENTURY FEDERAL EFFORTS DESIGNED TO ELIMINATE THE "INDIAN PROBLEM."]

 

a. Federal Relations with American Indians, 1787 to 1886 Following are the highlights of federal policies toward American Indians during this first period.

1. Treaties, as we have already discussed, formed the cornerstone of federal Indian policy during this first period.
2. Supreme Court cases, again as we have already discussed, provided the basis for the federal trust relationship which emerged during this period and greatly limited the exercise of Indian sovereignty.

 

3. Federal Policies like the Removal Act, as discussed earlier, also were enacted during this first period. Removal, as you will remember, became the basis of ãland exchangesä whereby Indian people were forcibly removed from their ancestral lands to be relocated in Indian territory.

 

a) Does anyone remember just where this territory was? Oklahoma. Be sure to show students the location of Oklahoma on a large map of the US.

b) Once in Indian territory, Indians were confined to reservations where they were encouraged to stop being Indians and adopt the ways of white men. It was thought that American Indians would be better served if they could be assimilated into American culture.

c) Discussion: What does assimilation mean?Is assimilation a negative or positive thing? Do you think removing American Indians to reservations was the best way to assimilate them into American society? Do you believe that Indians had to be assimilated into European-American society in order for both peoples to co-exist? What else could the federal government have done? What else could tribal governments have done?

4. Despite federal efforts to make Indians more like the white man, very few Indians were interested in assimilating.

a) Discussion: Why did Indians refuse to assimilate? Would you be willing to give up all of your cultural traditions, religious beliefs, attitudes about politics, and ideas about how you might make a living? How would you feel if some foreign government demanded that you do so, and threatened the lives of you and your family if you refused?

 

b) Many Indians refused to be confined to the land on the reservation and against confinement efforts. Thus, the federal government adopted another policy-making strategy for dealing with the ãIndian problem.ä This strategy - allotment, moved the federal government into its next era of policy making.

 

b. Federal Relations with American Indians, 1886 to 1934. Following are the highlights of this period which began with the most controversial of all federal Indian policies, allotment.

 

1. Allotment and the Dawes Severalty Act of 1887. With the passage of this Act, policy makers sought to destroy the cultural, political, and economic continuity of the Indian communities on the reservation. They believed that if they could move Indians out of their communities and onto individual farms, Indians would shed their Indian ways, become interested in farming for profit, and ultimately, become assimilated.

a) The act allotted - or assigned - parcels of 80 to 160 acres of reservation lands to individual Indian families.

b) In addition, the Act stipulated that ãexcessä land could be sold for non-Indian settlement. What this meant was that if Indians choose not to take their allotted lands, that unalloted land could then be sold. Most of these lands were lost to taxes that Indians did not know were owed.

 

1) Discussion: Why would Indians choose not to be involved in allotment? The idea of individual ownership of land that was farmed for profit was diametrically opposed to the economic lifestyles of the vast majority of American Indian tribes. Instead, for thousands of years, most American Indians had owned their land communally, sharing all the work and benefits that come from communal ownership.

2) What do you think was the ultimate result of allotment. Letâs take a graphic look at what happened. [OVERHEAD - COMPARATIVE TRIBAL LANDS]. This overhead shows that by 1660, Indian Nations owned and controlled almost all of North America.

a) Within 120 years, they had lost almost one-third of that land, and 80 years later, they had lost about two-thirds of their original land.
b) Just 40 years later before Dawes was enacted, their land had been reduced to 138 million acres, less than 1 percent of their original land ownership.
c) By 1934, another 90 million acres were lost, so that 60 percent more Indian land fell under the control of non-Indians.

 

3) How many of you have been on a large Indian reservation? If you have, or if you havenât and simply look at a map of various reservations, you will notice that the land is often not contiguous. What is contiguous? The land is separated and does not share common boundaries. This is because of the Dawes Act and allotment. This means that today, both Indians and non-Indians live on reservation land. What kinds of problems would arise on such a reservation? The largest problems are over land use - with many Indians wishing to keep the land in its natural state and ranchers and loggers wishing to use the land in a manner that dramatically alters it.

2. At the same time that allotment was being promoted by the federal government, new assimilation policy was also being conceptualized. In 1879 when the Carlisle Indian Industrial Boarding School in Pennsylvania opened its doors, its goal was to force Indian children to shed any ties to their tribal communities. These children were forbidden to speak their native language, forcing them to dress in western style clothing, keeping them away from practicing cultural religious rituals, and training them in vocational skills.

Note to the teacher: For more information on Indian boarding schools see the special topics paper on our web site titled, Indian Boarding Schools: Tools of Forced Assimilation, 1870 to 1934. [This should be linked.] For a two-to-three day lesson on Indian boarding schools, see the Part III of the Eighth grade lesson plan. Please note that there are many excellent photos and primary sources hotlinked in both of these sources - photos and primary sources that could be used in this part of the 11th grade lesson plan.

3. When Indian Nations resisted these federal policies, the US government interpreted such resistance as a declaration of war. Thus, toward the end of the nineteenth century, the United States army was involved in an unstated and unlegislated policy of elimination which was aimed to destroy the power of any Indian Nations and, if necessary, destroy the Indian Peoples themselves.

a. The majority of US military wars against the Indians occurred between 1866 and 1891. According to official records for this 25-year period, the Army was involved in 1,065 combat engagements with Indians.

b. The wars waged against the Sioux, Cheyenne, and Arahapo provides a tragic example of such a military encounter. As we read aloud about this war, keep in mind that the Wounded Knee Massacre marked the end of Indian empowerment on the Western plains. Further, the history of the Sioux Nation with the US government could apply to virtually all Native Peoples. [OVERHEAD - THE WAR AGAINST THE SIOUX, CHEYENNE, AND ARAPAHO.]

 c. Discussion: How and why did the federal government violate its treaty obligations to the Sioux, Cheyenne, and Arahapo? Why is General George Armstrong Custer considered to be a hero to most Americans and a villain to these Indian Nations? What do you believe he should be considered?

 d. Why do you think these Nations continued to resist the federal government? Do you believe they had any other choice? Why or why not.

 4. In the first few decades of the twentieth century, federal Indian policy continued to be dominated by assimilation attempts and actions designed to dismantle Indian sovereignty and destroy Indian culture. However, beginning in 1934 at the height of the depression in the U.S., Commissioner of Indian Affairs John Collier reorganized the BIA and the attitudes that had shaped its policies. Thus, the third era in federal Indian relations was launched. This will be the focus of tomorrowâs discussion.

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Day Two

                    c. The Third Era of Federal Indian Relations, 1934 to 1956.

 

1) From 1934 to 1958, the federal government used two different avenues to define its relations with American Indians:

a) from 1934 to 1953, it passed a series of laws that sought to reorganize and revitalize Indian cultures, languages, governments, and spiritual practices in a manner that was consistent with non-Indian perceptions about Indians.

b) from 1953 to 1956, it passed a series of laws that focused on terminating the trust relationship between American Indians and the federal government.
 

2) Reorganization, as it has been termed, grew out of the Indian New Deal which sought to revitalize Indian cultures, languages, governments, and spiritual practices. While Collierâs crusade to champion Indian rights was genuine, it was guided by his ideas of what was in their best interests, not by what Indian Nations believed they needed.

a) The centerpiece of the Indian New Deal was the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act (IRA).

b) Discussion: What does the timeline says about the IRA? Why do you think the IRA became public policy in the 1930s? It was part of President Franklin Delano Rooseveltâs New Deal programs. Indeed, Collier had called it an ãIndian New Deal.ä What was the New Deal? Was this really a new deal for Indians? Explain.

 

c) Assignment: Take out your history textbook. Spend the next 10 minutes finding out what your textbook says about John Collier, the Indian New Deal, and the IRA. Write down what you found on your timeline.

 

d) Discussion: What did you find? Where you surprised? Why or why not? Why is there so little information on this topic?

e) While the majority of federally-recognized tribes accepted the IRA, a large number chose not to accept it. Discussion: Why do you think so many tribal nations reject the IRA? Because they believed that...

 

1) The US government was again imposing their perception how Indians nations should be organized politically, socially, and economically be organized. By requiring each nation that wished to be federally-recognized to make a constitution modeled on western traditions, not tribal traditions. Non-traditional governing structures were imposed on their own reservations.

2) The IRA failed to recognize the diversity of Indian life by expecting Indians to function as uniform and unified tribes.

 

3) The IRA imposed voting majority rule upon tribes, a practice that was alien to traditional decision-making which was by consensual agreement;

4) The IRA gave the federal government even more control over Indian political, social, and economic decision-making.

 

f) Why did so many tribal nations accept it? Many had become dependent upon the federal government and needed the benefits and services promised through the trust relationship to survive.

 

g) Many Indian and non-Indian people have stated that the IRA was a deliberate attempt by the federal government to further divide and conquer Indian people. What does divide and conquer mean? Do you think the Indian People were divided after IRA? How and why? Although many tribal councils established by the IRA represented the best interests of their people, some became ãpuppet governmentsä that reflected BIA and non-Indian values, rather than those of traditional American Indians. Thus, many Indian Nations have been split internally by those who support the IRA and the federal government, and by those who support more traditional ways often frowned opposed and outlawed by the federal government.

 

3) In 1946, Congress was ready to admit that some injustices had been committed throughout its treaty-making history. Thus, it proposed to compensate tribes for injustices, but not to pay for the stolen lands, through the newly-created Indian Claims Commission which was designed to review tribal grievances about treaty enforcement and management and to resolve long-term disputes between the US governments and various Indian Nations.

a) By 1978 when the Commission ended operations, it had settled 285 cases and tribes were paid more than $800 million in settlements.
b) The settlements, however, exacted a toll on many tribes who were divided internally about the process. Some split as one faction favored a reparations, while another faction argued that taking the money would be seen as acceptance of pennies-on-the-dollar payment for the land (a decision laer affirmed by the US Supreme Court.) Others disagreed over whether payments should be made to individuals within the tribe, or invested by tribal officials in the reservation economy.

4) Internal tribal conflict intensified with the passage of termination policies in the 1950s which were designed to end federal services to Indian tribes and to relocate tribal members into urban areas where they were expected to find jobs and assimilate.

a) Termination sought to eliminate the federal governmentâs historical trust responsibilities to the Indian Nations. Terminated tribal nations were subject to state rather than federal jurisdiction.
b) Between 1954 and 1962, 61 tribes were officially terminated. During that period, about one in eight Indians left the reservations and moved to cities, most of whom joined the ranks of the urban poor in low-paying jobs. Many of these tribes have since reapplied for and received federally-recognized status.

c. Discussion: Why didnât termination work? What might have been a more effective federal policy from the perspective of Indians in this period?

 

d. Assignment: Again using your textbook, spend the next five minutes determining if there is any discussion on termination. Write anything you find on your timeline.

 

e. Discussion: What did you find?

 

5) Assignment: For the remainder of the period, your responsibility is to produce two products:

 

a. An addition to those portions of your textbook where you think it should include information on both the Indian Reorganization Act and Termination. You must write at least a paragraph on each topic, identify exactly what page and paragraph you would place it in the textbook, and provide a transition sentence from the existing text to the text you think should be included.

 

b. Write a brief letter to the publisher of our textbook in which you explain that you are submitting these revisions. Be sure to include at least three reasons why you think they must be included in the next edition of the book.

 

c. If you do not finish this in class, you may turn it in at the beginning of class tomorrow.

2. Option Two - Group Work. Divide the class into a maximum of 9 groups of three or four students each. Three groups will be doing more research on the policies found in the first chronological section of the timeline - 1787 to 1886 (Note - because there are 17 items in this section, these groups should each have four students in them); three groups for the second chronological section - 1886 to 1934 (Note - because there are only 10 items in this section, these groups should each have three students in them);; and three groups for the third chronological section - 1934 to 1968 (Note - because there are only 7 items in this section, these groups should each have three students in them);.

 

a. Display the overhead that explains the entire assignment. [OVERHEAD - GROUP TIMELINE ASSIGNMENT]. The assignment is summarized as follows:

 

1) First, students assign themselves a certain number of the items found in their chronological section. For instance:

 

a) In the 1787 to 1886 group, there are 17 items so each of the four students should be responsible for four items, and one will be responsible for three.

 

b) In the 1886 to 1934 group, there are 10 items so each of the three students should be responsible for three items, and one will be responsible for four.

 

c) In the 1934 to 1968 group, there are only items so each of the three students should be responsible for two items, and one will be responsible for three.

2) Second, students refer to their US history textbooks and find out if any of the policies in their chronological section are mentioned and/or discussed. Once each has completed their items, the whole group should work together to create two lists:

 

a) A list of all policies/items that are discussed in the textbook, followed by a brief paragraph explaining the policy by combining the information in the textbook and the information in your timeline.

 b) A list of all policies/items that are not discussed anywhere in the textbook.
 c) These two lists must be completed by the end of the period and the teacher must check with each group to be certain the requirements have been met. These lists will comprise 10% of the final grade on this project. Make certain that someone in the group keeps the list for use tomorrow.

3) Third, on the second day of Part II, students will spend the entire period in either the computer lab, the library, or both.

a) They divide the items that were not discussed in their textbooks between them, and try to find new information (beyond what they already have in the timeline) about each of the items that they did not find. They must write a paragraph for each policy that includes any new-found information. If they are unable to find information, they must have the sources they consulted written down.

 

b) At the end of the period, each student must have his/her paragraphs and/or list of consulted sources. You will collect the materials which will comprise 30% of the final grade on this project.

4) Fourth, the teacher will then put all the information group members found together in three packets. All the information from the three groups doing the first chronological section will be put together, as will the information from the three groups doing the second and third chronological sections.

Note to the teacher: In order to conserve paper and duplication expenses, you may want to give students half pieces of paper on which to write their paragraph. Using front and back, you can then put four paragraphs of information on one piece of paper.

 

5) Fifth, at the beginning of the next class period, students will each receive a packet that refers to the combined findings of all three groups for their time period. This is when the final part of their assignment begins. As a homework assignment, each student will use this information to write a creative piece for their textbook on federal Indian affairs during their period. The assignment will be due on the Monday following the weekend and will be worth 60% of the total grade. (The expectations for the assignment are all spelled out on the Overhead.)

III. Summary. Let's go back to our ãKnowä and ãWant to Learnä chart that we put together on the first day of this new unit on American Indians. I have added a third column to the chart on this overhead. We are now going to add ãWhat we Learnedä so that we can summarize the last four days.

 

Note to the teacher: Now is the time to use the overhead that you were asked to put together after the first day of the lesson plan. In this new third column, write down the answers your students provide. Be sure to ask students questions that will help guide them to the central ideas and concepts discussed in the Lesson Plan Conclusions below. Ask students to take notes on these answers as they provide the summary/conclusions/main ideas of what you have discussed over the past four days.

A. Lesson Plan Conclusions:

 

1. During the first century of federal Indian relations, the consequences upon the American Indian people were disastrous.

a. The Indian population had dramatically decreased. Between 6 - 10 million Native Peoples lived in the US at the time of its birth, down from an estimated 50 million who lived in North America in 1492; by 1900, less than 250,000 Indian people remained and the majority of tribes were on the brink of extinction.

b. Most surviving Indians had been forced onto reservations or lived on allotted lands where they were expected to shed their ãIndiannessä and become ãcivilized,ä Christianized, and Anglicized.

c. The self-sufficiency and ecological balance that characterized the Indian tribes at the time of European settlement had been nearly destroyed. From the early 1800s forward, the Native Americans were forced into a position of economic dependency upon the US government.

d. The majority of Indian tribal lands had passed into white ownership. Between 1887 and 1934, tribal lands dwindled an additional 60 percent.

 

2. At least three separate avenues were taken when making federal Indian policies in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries:

 

a. From 1787 through 1886, the federal government relied upon over 370 treaties, several key US Supreme Court decisions, and various federal laws, all of which diminished the exercise of sovereignty Indian Nations and expropriated Indian land and natural resources. In return, the federal government undertook the trust responsibility - the promise to provide Indian Nations who gave up their land with necessary benefits and services.

 b. From 1886 to 1934, the federal government passed laws and executive orders that created new policies which defined the relationship between the federal government and American Indian Peoples. The primary policies - allotment, assimilation, and elimination - resulted in the further loss of Indian land and the genocide of Indian political, economic, cultural, and spiritual ways and beliefs.

 

c. From 1934 to 1956, the federal government used two different avenues to define its relations with American Indians:

1) From 1934 to 1953, it passed a series of laws that sought to revitalize Indian cultures, languages, governments, and spiritual practices in a manner that was consistent with non-Indian perceptions about Indians.

2) From 1953 to 1956, it passed a series of laws that focused on terminating the trust relationship between American Indians and the federal government.
 

 3. These policies were directly responsible for the above consequences. Such policies, taken as a whole, indicate that these disastrous consequences were hardly unintentional, nor were they an inevitable or unintended by-product of progress.

a. Rather, these policies were the result of intentional decisions made by federal policymakers to officially remove the so-called ãIndian problem.ä

b. Discussion: If we accept that many of these policies were intentional and consequently, resulted in the demise of over 90 percent of all American Indians, can we say that Indians were victims of genocide? What is genocide? Letâs look at the United Nationâs definition of genocide. [OVERHEAD - GENOCIDE]. What do you think?

 

4. Despite these genocidal policies against the Indians which occurred at the hands of Europeans and European Americans, the Indian Nations were not destroyed totally, nor did they fully or willingly relinquish their cultural and spiritual heritage. Those who survived the first 200 years of European contact fought against assimiliation. With the progression of the twentieth century, many Indian Nations gradually were revitalized as they continued active resistance against becoming Americanized and losing their tribal identities.

 

Discussion: Have your opinions and attitudes about American Indians shifted over the past few days? How and why?

IV. Part Two Assessment. The assessment for this two-day lesson has been built into both options. If the teacher chooses the group assignment, the assessment is a more detailed 2-3 page paper that is due after 1-1/2 days of class time and an additional weekend of homework. If the teacher chooses the lecture/discussion assignment, assessment involves student input during the discussions, as well as the individual textbook rewrite and letter to the publisher.