DOCSLIB.ORG

Educational Achievement, Engagement, and Persistence in Choctaw Nation: a Study of the Success Through Academic Recognition Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Educational Achievement, Engagement, and Persistence in Choctaw Nation: a Study of the Success Through Academic Recognition Program University of Denver Digital Commons @ DU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 2020 Educational Achievement, Engagement, and Persistence in Choctaw Nation: A Study of the Success Through Academic Recognition Program Suzanne Delap Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd Part of the Educational Psychology Commons, Elementary Education Commons, Indigenous Education Commons, Indigenous Studies Commons, School Psychology Commons, and the Secondary Education Commons Educational Achievement, Engagement, and Persistence in Choctaw Nation: A Study of the Success Through Academic Recognition Program __________ A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Morgridge College of Education University of Denver __________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy __________ by Suzanne Delap March 2020 Advisor: Dr. Gloria Miller ©Copyright by Suzanne Delap 2020 All Rights Reserved Author: Suzanne Delap Title: Educational Achievement, Engagement, and Persistence in Choctaw Nation: A Study of the Success Through Academic Recognition Program Advisor: Dr. Gloria Miller Degree Date: March 2020 Abstract The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma has developed a unique initiative to support academic achievement within their tribal territory. The Success Through Academic Recognition (STAR) program is an example of an Indigenously-developed approach to supporting students from grades 2-12, with the hope of promoting achievement, persistence, and engagement. To study the STAR program, a mixed-methods approach was employed to first analyze quantitative demographic and performance data collected from a cohort of high school students from 2014 to 2018. Next, phenomenological interviews were conducted within the same cohort, to describe the lived experiences of STAR students within the Choctaw community. The database portion of this project adds to the existing literature by exploring a previously unresearched academic incentive program, which was wholly developed by and for Native peoples. The interview component of this research provides insight for school psychologists regarding student perceptions of STAR as a Choctaw-developed initiative for educational success, thereby shedding light on the critical components of community and culture which form the foundations for our work with indigenous populations. ii Acknowledgements There are numerous people who contributed to this research, and I would like to thank as many as I can (though any exclusion is unintentional). First, I would like to thank Choctaw Nation and my panel members: Mr. Jason Campbell, Mr. Carey Fuller, Mr. Todd Hughes, Ms. Ashley James, Dr. Celia Stall-Meadows, Ms. Chantelle Standefer, Dr. Ian Thompson, and the Choctaw Nation IRB and Language School. Special thanks also go to Mr. Ignacio Ybarra and Khoji Ybarra of Mizuni Software. At DU, I am deeply indebted to Dr. Gloria Miller, Dr. Frédérique Chevillot, Dr. Jeanine Coleman, Dr. Kathy Green, and Dr. Chris Nelson for their support and guidance. Last but not least, this research is dedicated to two families, the Delaps and the Derryberrys. I could not have done this without you. iii Table of Contents Preface ................................................................................................................................ 1 Chapter One: Introduction .............................................................................................. 2 The High School to College Pipeline...................................................................... 2 Educational Statistics .............................................................................................. 3 Intervention and Indigenous Initiatives .................................................................. 5 Itapela Hosh Nana Yakomichi – Choctaw Nation and Education .......................... 6 The STAR Program ................................................................................................ 7 Motivation and Reinforcement ............................................................................... 9 Research Statement and Query ............................................................................. 10 Quantitative Research Questions .......................................................................... 12 Qualitative Research Questions ............................................................................ 13 Definition of Terms............................................................................................... 13 Chapter Two: Literature Review and Theoretical Orientation ................................. 16 The Chahta People and Origins of STAR ............................................................ 16 History of Choctaw Education .............................................................................. 17 Traditional Society ................................................................................................ 17 From Tribal Tradition to Missionary Schools ...................................................... 18 Post Removal and Contemporary ......................................................................... 21 Theoretical Framework ......................................................................................... 25 Transculturation .................................................................................................... 25 Western Motivation Theory – Social Cognitive Theory (SCT)............................ 28 Native American Motivation Theory – Family, Funds of Knowledge, and Inherited Trauma ................................................................................................... 31 Demographic Effects on Educational Outcomes .................................................. 33 Systemic Bias ........................................................................................................ 36 Cultural Variations ................................................................................................ 38 Chapter Three: Methods ................................................................................................ 40 Mixed Methods Approach .................................................................................... 40 Access ................................................................................................................... 41 Overview of Participant Selection ........................................................................ 42 Definition of Measures ......................................................................................... 43 Independent Variables .......................................................................................... 44 Dependent Variables ............................................................................................. 45 Dataset................................................................................................................... 45 Quantitative Analysis Methods ............................................................................. 46 Question 1 – Educational Achievement and Engagement .................................... 46 Multinomial Coding .............................................................................................. 46 Assumptions – Multinomial................................................................................... 47 Assumptions – Binomial ........................................................................................ 49 iv Question 2 – Educational Persistence over Time ................................................. 50 Qualitative Analysis Methods ............................................................................... 51 Phenomenology..................................................................................................... 51 Interview Participant Selection and Data Management ........................................ 53 Saturation .............................................................................................................. 54 Data Security ......................................................................................................... 56 Procedures of Institutional Review Board (IRB) .................................................. 57 Considerations of Method ..................................................................................... 57 Chapter Four: Results .................................................................................................... 59 Quantitative ........................................................................................................... 59 Factors Affecting Educational Achievement ........................................................ 59 Factors Affecting Educational Engagement ......................................................... 66 Factors Affecting Educational Persistence ........................................................... 67 Quantitative Summary .......................................................................................... 71 Qualitative ............................................................................................................. 72 Self-Motivation ..................................................................................................... 74 Iksa (Support)........................................................................................................ 78 Iyyi Kowa (Service)..............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Child Development Center Opens in Durant
    A Choctaw The 5 Tribes 6th veteran value Storytelling Annual tells his of hard Conference Pow Wow story work to be held Page 5 Page 7 Page 10 Page 14 BISKINIK CHANGE SERVICE REQUESTED PRESORT STD P.O. Box 1210 AUTO Durant OK 74702 U.S. POSTAGE PAID CHOCTAW NATION BISKINIKThe Official Publication of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma November 2010 Issue Serving 203,830 Choctaws Worldwide Choctaws ... growing with pride, hope and success Tribal Council holds October Child Development Center opens in Durant regular session By LARISSA COPELAND The Choctaw Nation Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma Tribal Council met on A ribboncutting was held Oct. 9 in regular session at the new state-of-the-art at Tushka Homma. Trib- Choctaw Nation Child De- al Council Speaker Del- velopment Center in Durant ton Cox called the meet- on Oct. 19, marking the end ing to order, welcomed of five years of preparation, guests and then asked for construction and hard work, committee reports. After and the beginning of learn- committee reports were ing, laughter and growth at given the Tribal Council the center. addressed new business. On hand for the cer- •Approval of sev- emony was Choctaw Chief eral budgets including: Gregory E. Pyle, Assistant Upward Bound Math/ Chief Gary Batton, Chicka- Science Program FY saw Nation Governor Bill 2011, DHHS Center for Anoatubby, U.S. Congress- Medicare and Medicaid man Dan Boren, Senator Services Center for Med- Jay Paul Gumm, Durant icaid and State Opera- Mayor Jerry Tomlinson, tions Children’s Health Chief Gregory E. Pyle, Assistant Chief Gary Batton, and a host of tribal, state and local dignitaries cut the rib- Durant City Manager James Insurance Program bon at the new Child Development Center in Durant.
    [Show full text]
  • Choctaw and Creek Removals
    Chapter 6 Choctaw and Creek Removals The idea of indian removal as a government obligation first reared its head in 1802 when officials of the state of Georgia made an agreement with federal government officials. In the Georgia Compact, the state of Georgia gave up its claims to territorial lands west of that state in exchange for $1,250,000 and a promise that the federal government would abolish Indian title to Georgia lands as soon as possible. How seriously the government took its obligation to Georgia at the time of the agreement is unknown. The following year, however, the Louisiana Purchase was made, and almost immedi- ately, the trans-Mississippi area was seen by some as the answer to “The Indian Problem.” Not everyone agreed. Some congress- men argued that removal to the West was impractical because of land-hungry whites who could not be restrained from crossing the mighty river to obtain land. Although their conclusion was correct, it was probably made more in opposition to President Jefferson than from any real con- cern about the Indians or about practicality. Although some offers were made by government officials to officials of various tribes, little Pushmataha, Choctaw was done about removing the southeastern tribes before the War of 1812. warrior During that war several Indian tribes supported the British. After the war ended, many whites demanded that tribal lands be confiscated by Removals 67 the government as punishment for Indians’ treasonous activities. Many Americans included all tribes in their confiscationdemands , evidently feeling that all Indians were guilty, despite the fact that many tribes did not participate in the war.
    [Show full text]
  • Read an Excerpt
    ooChoctaw Tales Collected and Annotated by TOM MOULD Contents xv Foreword xix Preface xxv Introduction 3 THE STORYTELLERS 3 Storytellers of the Past 15 Storytellers of the Present 38 THE GENRES OF CHOCTAW STORYTELLING 40 Native Terms 45 Commentary and Contextualization 53 Patterns and Performance 57 A Note on the Texts 61 CREATION STORIES AND MYTHS 64 The Choctaw Creation Legend 65 Nané Chaha 65 Men and Grasshoppers 66 Creation of the Tribes 67 Origin of the Crawfish Band 68 The Creation of the Choctaw vii viii CONTENTS 71 The Migration Legend 72 Migration 73 A Short Story of the Creation of the First Man 73 Tradition of the Flood 75 The Flood 76 Lightning and Thunder 77 The Origin of Corn 77 Corn-Finding Myth 78 Wild Geese and the Origin of Corn 78 The Geese, the Ducks, and Water 79 The Life of Dogs 80 How the Snakes Acquired Their Poison 81 The Owl 81 Tashka and Walo 83 The Hunter of the Sun 85 Yallofalaiya 88 Nameless Choctaw 92 The Hunter and the Alligator 94 SUPERNATURAL LEGENDS AND ENCOUNTERS 97 The Girl and the Devil 98 The Eagle Story 99 Skate’ne 101 Hoklonote’she 101 A Story of Kashikanchak 103 Kashikanchak 104 The Spectre and the Hunter 107 The Hunter Who Became a Deer 109 The Man Who Became a Snake CONTENTS ix 112 Half-Horse, Half-Man 113 Kashehotapalo 113 Na Losa Falaya 114 Manlike Creature 115 Okwa Nahollo—White People of the Water 116 Big Pond 117 The Water Choctaw 117 Påß Falaya 121 Nishkin Chafa—One-Eye 123 Headless Man 123 The Inhuman Na Losa Chitto 124 The Demon Na Losa Chitto 125 A Big Hog 126 Big Black Hairy Monster
    [Show full text]
  • Tribal and House District Boundaries
    ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Tribal Boundaries and Oklahoma House Boundaries ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 22 ! 18 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 13 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 20 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 7 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Cimarron ! ! ! ! 14 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 11 ! ! Texas ! ! Harper ! ! 4 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! n ! ! Beaver ! ! ! ! Ottawa ! ! ! ! Kay 9 o ! Woods ! ! ! ! Grant t ! 61 ! ! ! ! ! Nowata ! ! ! ! ! 37 ! ! ! g ! ! ! ! 7 ! 2 ! ! ! ! Alfalfa ! n ! ! ! ! ! 10 ! ! 27 i ! ! ! ! ! Craig ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! h ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 26 s ! ! Osage 25 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! a ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 6 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Tribes ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 16 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! W ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 21 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 58 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 38 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Tribes by House District ! 11 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 1 Absentee Shawnee* ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Woodward ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 2 ! 36 ! Apache* ! ! ! 40 ! 17 ! ! ! 5 8 ! ! ! Rogers ! ! ! ! ! Garfield ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 1 40 ! ! ! ! ! 3 Noble ! ! ! Caddo* ! ! Major ! ! Delaware ! ! ! ! ! 4 ! ! ! ! ! Mayes ! ! Pawnee ! ! ! 19 ! ! 2 41 ! ! ! ! ! 9 ! 4 ! 74 ! ! ! Cherokee ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Ellis ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 41 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 72 ! ! ! ! ! 35 4 8 6 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 5 3 42 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 77
    [Show full text]
  • Student Handbook
    2021 – 2022 Student Handbook FAIR ELEMENTARY (K-2) LOUISVILLE ELEMENTARY (3-5) EILAND MIDDLE (6-8) LOUISVILLE HIGH (9-12) NANIH WAIYA (K-12) NOXAPATER (K-12) LOUISVILLE REACHES WINSTON-LOUISVILLE CAREER TECHNOLOGY CENTER Table of Contents LMSD Calendar for 2021-22 1 District Vision, Mission, Beliefs, Motto 2 Board of Trustees 2 Administrative Staff 3 School Admission Requirements 3-4 Registration 4-6 Instructional Management Plan 6 Visitors on Campus 6 Vehicles on Campus 6 Solicitation/Fundraising by Students 6 MS Student Religious Liberties Act of 2013 7 Delivery of Flowers and Balloons to Students 7 Student Illness or Emergencies 7-8 Tardies 8-9 Permission to Leave School During the Day 9 Student Absences from School 9-11 Cafeteria Rules and Prices 11 Textbook/ Chromebook Fines Assessment 12 Grooming and Dress 13-14 Phones and Personal Electronic Devices 14-17 Grading Policy 17-29 Credit Recovery Policy 29-31 Hardship Work Release Policy 31 Surveillance of Students 31-32 Student Discipline 32-35 School Bus Regulations 35-36 MS School Safety Act of 2019 37 Bullying, Hazing or Harassment 37-38 Library Media Center Regulations 39 Acceptable Use Policy 39-42 1 Cyberbullying 42-45 MSHSAA Requirements 45-47 Drug Testing Policy 47-50 REACHES/LMSD Alternative School 51-55 Tribal/Parental Involvement 55 The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act 56 Student Handbook Verification 57 Bullying Complaint Form 58 Active Parent 59 The Louisville Municipal School District complies with all federal and state laws and regulations in employment and in the delivery of educational services. The District does not discriminate on the basis of religion, race, color, national origin or ancestry, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, marriage, or veteran status or disability.
    [Show full text]
  • Outline of United States Federal Indian Law and Policy
    Outline of United States federal Indian law and policy The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to United States federal Indian law and policy: Federal Indian policy – establishes the relationship between the United States Government and the Indian Tribes within its borders. The Constitution gives the federal government primary responsibility for dealing with tribes. Law and U.S. public policy related to Native Americans have evolved continuously since the founding of the United States. David R. Wrone argues that the failure of the treaty system was because of the inability of an individualistic, democratic society to recognize group rights or the value of an organic, corporatist culture represented by the tribes.[1] U.S. Supreme Court cases List of United States Supreme Court cases involving Indian tribes Citizenship Adoption Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30 (1989) Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl, 530 U.S. _ (2013) Tribal Ex parte Joins, 191 U.S. 93 (1903) Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 (1978) Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30 (1989) South Dakota v. Bourland, 508 U.S. 679 (1993) Civil rights Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe, 435 U.S. 191 (1978) United States v. Wheeler, 435 U.S. 313 (1978) Congressional authority Ex parte Joins, 191 U.S. 93 (1903) White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136 (1980) California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 480 U.S. 202 (1987) South Dakota v. Bourland, 508 U.S. 679 (1993) United States v.
    [Show full text]
  • The Choctaw Nation and the Dawes Commission
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Master's Theses Theses and Dissertations 1954 The Choctaw Nation and the Dawes Commission Jeanne Francis Moore Loyola University Chicago Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Moore, Jeanne Francis, "The Choctaw Nation and the Dawes Commission" (1954). Master's Theses. 1157. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/1157 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 1954 Jeanne Francis Moore THE CHOCTAW INDIANS AND THE DAWES COMMISSION by ;' Sister. Jeanne Francis Moore A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate Scnoo1 of Loyola University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts June 1954 --------._-------------,------_.. -.. ,._-- \ LIFE Sister Jeanne Francis Moore was born in Indianapolis, Indiana, , May 20, 1906. ; She was graduated from the Saint John Acad.~, Indianapolis, IndianaI June 20, 1923 and entered the novitiate of the Sisters of Providence Q~ Septem-~ ber 7, 1923. She received her degree of Bachelor of Arts from Saint Mar.y-of- the-Woods College in June, 1942. From 1926 to 1942 she taught in the elementar.y parochial schools of Chicago, Illinois; Fort Wayne, Indiana; Washington, D.C. After receiving her degree she taught at the Immaculata Seminar.y in Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Indian Place-Names in Mississippi. Lea Leslie Seale Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1939 Indian Place-Names in Mississippi. Lea Leslie Seale Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Part of the English Language and Literature Commons Recommended Citation Seale, Lea Leslie, "Indian Place-Names in Mississippi." (1939). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 7812. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/7812 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MANUSCRIPT THESES Unpublished theses submitted for the master^ and doctorfs degrees and deposited in the Louisiana State University Library are available for inspection* Use of any thesis is limited by the rights of the author* Bibliographical references may be noted3 but passages may not be copied unless the author has given permission# Credit must be given in subsequent written or published work# A library which borrows this thesis for vise by its clientele is expected to make sure that the borrower is aware of the above restrictions, LOUISIANA. STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 119-a INDIAN PLACE-NAMES IN MISSISSIPPI A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisian© State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In The Department of English By Lea L # Seale M* A*, Louisiana State University* 1933 1 9 3 9 UMi Number: DP69190 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
    [Show full text]
  • Choctaw Culture and the Evolution of Corporal Punishment Steven M
    American Indian Law Review Volume 23 | Number 2 1-1-1999 Now We Have Forgotten the Old Indian Law: Choctaw Culture and the Evolution of Corporal Punishment Steven M. Karr Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/ailr Part of the Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons Recommended Citation Steven M. Karr, Now We Have Forgotten the Old Indian Law: Choctaw Culture and the Evolution of Corporal Punishment, 23 Am. Indian L. Rev. 409 (1999), https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/ailr/vol23/iss2/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in American Indian Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOW WE HAVE FORGOTTEN THE OLD INDIAN LAW: CHOCTAW CULTURE AND THE EVOLUTION OF CORPORAL PUNISHMENT Steven M. Karr* Unconsciously the savage, in his primitive thought concepts based upon physical reaction, went beyond either morality or its religious correlations. The abstractconcepts of good and evil, as we understandthem, and as Christianitybroadcast them through the mouthpiece of its anthropomorphicgodhead, meant nothing at all to the savage. Because of this, in all primitive societies, punishment, as observed and examined through humanitarian spectacles, is a barbarousprocedure.' Euro-American civilization's interpretations of alien societies demonstrates a narrow understanding of different cultures and customs. Too often modem societies imposed their own standards of social interaction upon societies deemed to be primitive with the intent of establishing more humane principles among these peoples.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Maupin Matthew Thesis
    UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA GRADUATE COLLEGE CROSS CULTURAL MEDICAL AND NATURAL KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE ON THE MISSISSIPPI FRONTIER BETWEEN GIDEON LINCECUM AND THE CHOCTAW NATION: 1818 TO 1833 A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN HISTORY OF SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND MEDICINE By MATTHEW KIRK MAUPIN Norman, Oklahoma 2016 CROSS CULTURAL MEDICAL AND NATURAL KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE ON THE MISSISSIPPI FRONTIER BETWEEN GIDEON LINCECUM AND THE CHOCTAW NATION: 1818 TO 1833 A THESIS APPROVED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY OF SCIENCE BY ______________________________ Dr. Suzanne Moon, Chair ______________________________ Dr. Kathleen Crowther ______________________________ Dr. Peter Soppelsa ______________________________ Dr. Joe Watkins © Copyright by MATTHEW KIRK MAUPIN 2016 All Rights Reserved. Table of Contents Table of Contents ...............................................................................................iv Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………vi Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1 Narrowing the Focus ....................................................................................... 3 Gideon Lincecum ............................................................................................ 4 Historiography ................................................................................................. 8 Chapter Outline ............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • November 2020 Biskinik
    From stickball stick door handles to the beaded light fixture, the Cultural Center is full of meaningful cultural references. Luksi waits to greet visitors to the children’s area locat- ed inside the Cultural Center. As guests enter the driveway leading to the Cultural Center they travel through native Oklaho- ma prairie land. The landscape around the building also continues this theme. Photos by Deidre Elrod and Mekayla Monroe (left) A statue of Tvshkahoma greets visitors at the Cultural Center. (right) The mound outside of the Cultural Center is a near duplicate of the mother November 2020 Issue mound, Nanih Waiya, in Mississippi. It is 39 feet tall, 420 feet long and 300 feet wide at the base, 192 feet long and 63 feet wide at the top. The mound is made up of 85,356 cubic yards of earth. Progress continues toward Cultural Center opening By Chris Jennings he replied, “I know very well who you are, but I wish you emphasized Halfmoon. to understand that I am Pushmataha, head Chief of the These areas of the Cultural Center make up roughly Construction continues on the 101,000 square foot Choctaws, and by the Eternal, I will not sign that treaty.” 90% of the building. The remaining 10% contains what Choctaw Cultural Center in Durant, despite the COVID-19 All the treaties signed by the Choctaws eventually led could be considered the most important part: the col- pandemic. Contractors and staff are at work, ensuring the to the Trail of Tears. Landscape 3 will tell the story of two lections and archive area.
    [Show full text]
  • Greg O'brien “Mushulatubbee and Choctaw Removal: Chief
    Mushulatubbee and Choctaw Removal: Chiefs Confront a Changing World By: Greg O'Brien “Mushulatubbee and Choctaw Removal: Chiefs Confront a Changing World,” Mississippi History Now (March 2001) Made available courtesy of Mississippi Historical Society: http://mshistory.k12.ms.us/ ***Reprinted with permission. No further reproduction is authorized without written permission from the Mississippi Historical Society. This version of the document is not the version of record. Figures and/or pictures may be missing from this format of the document.*** Article: One of Mississippi's and the United States' most inhumane actions was the forced removal of American Indians from the South to lands west of the Mississippi River in the early 1800s. Removal occurred because of an incessant demand for Indian lands. Demands for Indian land resulted from Anglo-American population growth in the South, the expansion of the short-staple cotton industry after Eli Whitney's cotton gin became widely available in the 1790s, the discovery of gold and other minerals on some Indian land, and simple racism. It did not help Indians that the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 provided lands to the west to which the United States could banish them, or that by 1815 there was no longer a viable European ally in the area who could counteract American demands. Indian Removal Act The Mississippi Legislature passed a resolution that went into effect in January 1830 extending its jurisdiction over Choctaw and Chickasaw territories within the state. Many Indians opposed this move and appealed to the United States government for assistance. Others accepted this new state of affairs and sought the best terms possible.
    [Show full text]