Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Language Revitalization
- All Subjects: A.B.D.
- Creators: Duplissis, Mark
- Member of: Theses and Dissertations
- Status: Published
Description
Throughout the course of the Honors Thesis/Creative Project, the intent was to gain knowledge regarding national, state and community initiatives regarding Indigenous Language Revitalization and Maintenance (ILRA). For over a year, I had the opportunity to visit a total of five indigenous communities, including Pine Ridge, SD, Gila River Indian Community, AZ, White Mountain Apache, AZ, Cochiti Pueblo, NM and Santo Domingo Pueblo, NM. The goal was to learn about the status of their language, current ILRA initiatives as well as challenges and successes that face American Indian nations. During each visit, key elements to successful language revitalization initiatives were identified that could benefit those continuing their effort to reverse language loss as well as those looking to enter in the field of language revitalization.
ContributorsHutchinson, Jenna Michelle (Author) / Romero-Little, Mary Eunice (Thesis director) / Begay, Jolyana (Committee member) / Sims, Christine P. (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / American Indian Studies Program (Contributor) / School of Human Evolution and Social Change (Contributor)
Created2014-12
Description
This study investigated the limitations of Navajo language teaching in Navajo Head Start immersion centers. The research questions asked what did Head Start teachers perceive as barriers to Navajo children successfully learning the Navajo language, what skills and knowledge did Head Start teachers have that were relevant to teach Head Start children the Navajo language, what Head Start teachers perceived as their strengths and weaknesses of the language immersion program, and what program and instructional qualities promoted and restricted the success of the language program? Two males and six females who resided in the western part of the Navajo Nation wee interviewed as to their teaching experiences. All of the interviewees were between the ages of late 40's to mid-60's and all spoke Navajo fluently. They had been employed with Head Start for more than 10 years. They came from families who had strong beliefs in the Navajo culture and language, and believed all teachers should take Navajo language and culture classes to teach in Head Start. The interviews revealed the participants use their traditional language and culture skills to teach Navajo, but they had limited knowledge as how to use the curriculum provided by Division of Dine Education. The English curriculum was accessible and easy to follow, but did not adhered to President Hale's Executive Order to perpetuate the language. It was recommended that Head Start administrators and support staff review the Navajo language policies and regulations, train teachers how to write a lesson plan that was simple and teacher friendly, revamp the curriculums, and train teachers how to critique, analyze and develop lessons from the Navajo Curriculum. In addition, administrators, should monitor and provide technical assistance to ensure teachers are implementing Navajo language instruction according to Navajo Standards and monitoring each child's progress according to developmental domains and assessment.
ContributorsClauschee, Jefferson (Author) / Appleton, Nicholas (Thesis advisor) / Spencer, Dee (Committee member) / Duplissis, Mark (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
ABSTRACT
This study identified the influences and processes of the dissertation completers, currently enrolled students, and non-completers of four cohorts (59 participants) in the Ed.D. administration program. The research questions sought answers as to why some students completed their dissertations and why some did not, the processes in completing a dissertation, and what should be included in a doctoral guide for completing the dissertation. The participants of this study were Ed.D. administration doctoral students in the field of educational leadership from a southwestern university. The job titles of the participants ranged from teacher to superintendent. The participants started the three-year doctoral program in the years 2004, 2005, 2006, or 2007. They were between the ages of 24 and 63. Survey Monkey provided the opportunity to request answers to different questions depending on the dissertation status—enrollee, completer, or non-completer.
This study entailed interviewing seven doctoral completers, five enrollees, and four non
completers. The significance of this mixed method study was to compare influences and
processes to determine suggestions for a study guide that could be used by future doctoral students, chairs, programs, and universities to help students complete their dissertations and become successful graduates. Recommendations are made (a) to recruit more African Americans and men into doctoral programs and the education field; (b) non-completers be invited to finish their dissertations with interventions and an accountable chair; (c) chairs provide his or her best help to meet the student half-way; (d) the department and university provide accountability measures and incentives for both the student and the chair; and (e) provide specific lessons that include finding a topic, researching a topic, and interacting with the chair; and (f) it was determined that non-completers were not timid as suggested in the literature but were found to have either changed their desire or fulfilled their desire by obtaining a promotion. In summary, a nurturing chair and a strong support system were found to be two major factors in determining the difference between doctoral completion and non-completion.
This study identified the influences and processes of the dissertation completers, currently enrolled students, and non-completers of four cohorts (59 participants) in the Ed.D. administration program. The research questions sought answers as to why some students completed their dissertations and why some did not, the processes in completing a dissertation, and what should be included in a doctoral guide for completing the dissertation. The participants of this study were Ed.D. administration doctoral students in the field of educational leadership from a southwestern university. The job titles of the participants ranged from teacher to superintendent. The participants started the three-year doctoral program in the years 2004, 2005, 2006, or 2007. They were between the ages of 24 and 63. Survey Monkey provided the opportunity to request answers to different questions depending on the dissertation status—enrollee, completer, or non-completer.
This study entailed interviewing seven doctoral completers, five enrollees, and four non
completers. The significance of this mixed method study was to compare influences and
processes to determine suggestions for a study guide that could be used by future doctoral students, chairs, programs, and universities to help students complete their dissertations and become successful graduates. Recommendations are made (a) to recruit more African Americans and men into doctoral programs and the education field; (b) non-completers be invited to finish their dissertations with interventions and an accountable chair; (c) chairs provide his or her best help to meet the student half-way; (d) the department and university provide accountability measures and incentives for both the student and the chair; and (e) provide specific lessons that include finding a topic, researching a topic, and interacting with the chair; and (f) it was determined that non-completers were not timid as suggested in the literature but were found to have either changed their desire or fulfilled their desire by obtaining a promotion. In summary, a nurturing chair and a strong support system were found to be two major factors in determining the difference between doctoral completion and non-completion.
ContributorsHardy, Linda (Author) / Appleton, Nicholas (Thesis advisor) / Spencer, Dee Ann (Committee member) / Duplissis, Mark (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015