Why I Am Voting Yes on 2

 

Above: (Top) The Bolling Building, which is the headquarters of the Boston Public Schools. (Bottom) A student filing in a "bubble sheet" for a standardized test.

This is not a post about what standardized tests do. The reality is that educational assessment is a complicated process. High-quality standardized tests can be helpful in assessing what students know, but they do not always measure what they intend to measure. More importantly, they are also only one of many assessments that teachers and schools use to get a fuller picture of what students understand and are able to do (see here for arguments on why standardized tests are problematic and evidence that students already take too many of them). 

Rather, this is a post about what standardized tests can't do. Standardized tests were never designed (and should never be used) to determine if a student should receive a high school diploma. As an educational researcher, I know a little about this. I remember my quantitative research methods professors as a doctoral student always telling us that "a test only measures what a test measures." So, you should never try to use that test to measure something it was not designed to do. The Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) was designed to measure one thing: basic comprehension in literacy, mathematics, and science. Students may be not only proficient, but advanced in other academic areas, such as history/social studies, world languages, art, music, theater, consumer and family sciences, computer science, vocational fields, or business, but if they do not reach an arbitrary MCAS score in only three subject area tests, they will not receive a diploma in Massachusetts.

The MCAS does not measure workforce or higher education readiness. The MCAS does not measure a student's ability to think critically or problem solve. The MCAS does not improve student's individual economic opportunity (but a student's economic opportunity can predict their MCAS score). The opponents of Question 2 will tell you an MCAS graduation requirement is necessary for all of these things to occur; they are being intentionally disingenuous (in fact many boldly claim that this ballot question will get rid of MCAS altogether, which it does not). Moreover, researchers have long known that social class may influence up to 84% of a student's MCAS score. In many ways, the MCAS tells us more about how much wealth a student's family or community has than it measures the quality of that student's schools or their individual learning. 

I write this post as a Boston Public Schools parent and a former classroom teacher in the Framingham Public Schools (and an education professor at UMass Boston), which are two districts where the MCAS graduation requirement has had devastating effects on our students. As a teacher, I would routinely see students drop out of school after they did not pass the MCAS exam in 10th grade (look at any school's, especially urban schools', enrollment data and that is where the student body starts to get smaller). As a parent, I hear many stories from fellow parents who have children with special needs or are language learners struggling to pass the MCAS and they have real worries about their children's futures, if they do not have a high school diploma. Based on these experiences, I strongly urge all voters to vote YES this fall on Question 2. Below I present my four main arguments for why you should vote YES.

Moreover, many of the opponents of Question 2 are not (past or present) public school parents, teachers, or students. Rather, they have a vested interest in the exams continuing to be required for graduation; some have made their political or academic careers from the multi-billion dollar standardized testing industry (or from campaigning for these types of testing-based education reforms), others are business leaders who have been sold a faulty view that an MCAS graduation exam improves their workforce, and still others do not believe in public education altogether (often attending themselves and sending their children to private schools without graduation exams) and will support anything that targets public education because they don't like paying taxes for them. The coalition who opposes Question 2 should have you questioning their motives (in full disclosure, I'm a public school parent, former high school teacher, current education professor, and Massachusetts Teachers Association union member; the MTA led the creation of this ballot question).

Above: (Top) Teachers and parents protest outside Mayor Ray Flynn's "State of the City" speech demanding more educational funding. (Bottom) Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld signs the Education Reform Act of 1993.

1. Massachusetts Can Be a National Leader in Educational Assessment

The MCAS graduation exam requirement was created as part of 1993 Education Reform Act in Massachusetts. This law was the result of a lawsuit by parents over unfair education funding, but became essentially a "grand bargain" between those politicians who wanted more education funding and those who wanted more accountability (which was not what the parents were demanding). However, the MCAS exam has also been part of a long history of standardized testing in the United States that is intertwined with racism and classism (often being used to justify segregation or economic policies that favored the wealthy in the 20th century). The Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (whose members mostly come from predominately white and wealthy communities) recently raised the MCAS score needed for graduation, which has meant that a larger number of students will be ineligible to earn a diploma. Question 2 would undo the punitive testing aspect of the Education Reform Act, while keeping the other parts that have improved schools in Massachusetts. And, we certainly have a lot to be proud of in Massachusetts, as our students are top in the nation in student achievement. But, don't be fooled by the opposition that claims this is because of a high-stakes graduation exam, which had nothing to do with it (rather, these improvements were probably despite it); only one other state in the top ten on NAEP has an exit exam, New Jersey, and there is a movement to get rid of their graduation exam there as well).

Yet, while Massachusetts may be a leader in student test scores, it has not been a leader in assessment and continues to use outdated assessment practices. Since the MCAS is high stakes, the state has continued to be cautious in making any major changes since it was first implemented in the early 2000s. Yet, a consortium of researchers and educators has been working on alternative assessments that could potentially replace the current MCAS exam and would offer teachers and schools much more meaningful data than a one-time basic assessment. The end of the MCAS graduation requirement would free up the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to also take bold steps and create a real "next generation" MCAS assessment that could have more focus on critical thinking and problem solving, or use potential performance-based assessments, giving schools much more valuable tools (without preventing students from receiving a diploma). This is not possible while the MCAS exam continues to serve multiple purposes, including as a graduation exam.

2. Many Students Are Hurt by as MCAS Graduation Requirement

Each year, about 1,200 students do not pass the MCAS graduation exam (with about 400 eventually receiving a diploma through an alternative program); 85% of those students have a disability or are immigrant students (that is almost 2% of12th grade students in Massachusetts). Some opponents of Question 2 dismiss this number as "not many." But more than one student who completed all graduation requirements at their school and not receive a diploma is one too many. Without a diploma, a student is unable to attend college, join a labor union, or frankly work in many professions, which has a major impact on their life opportunities. Students who do not receive a high school diploma are more likely to be unemployed or incarcerated. Moreover, we know that additional 18% of students who fail the exam drop out of school well before graduation. If this ballot question passes, it may be the single most important tool in decreasing the Massachusetts drop out rate (Massachusetts has the potential to have a near 100% graduation rate if the 2% of students who drop out due to the MCAS graduation exam stayed in school and completed their courses of study).

Above: Massachusetts has a 96% graduation rate (making it one of the top in the nation); eliminating the MCAS graduation requirement could help get that closer to 98 or 99%.

3. It Will Increase Massachusetts Education Standards

The passage of this ballot question will raise educational standards. Currently, this one test, which measures something very narrow, decides if students receive a diploma in Massachusetts. Instead, if this ballot measure passes, the state will likely move to make MassCore, which is the current optional set of graduation requirements, required for all districts (Senate education chair Jason Lewis will submit the bill in January; it is currently only a suggested graduation guideline as of now, since the MCAS exam is the only legislated graduation requirement; creating standard graduation requirements for all high schools would align Massachusetts with the 42 other states that do not have graduation exams but instead consistent graduation requirements across schools). Question 2 opponents keep claiming without an MCAS graduation requirement, there will be a "different set of requirements for each district," but that is misleading; all teachers must currently follow the state's educational standards found in the curriculum frameworks, which are generally seen as a national model). They also claim, "MCAS graduation requirement helps institute 'corrective action' by allowing comparisons of student performance across different schools and districts"; also incorrect. MCAS will continue to exist and allow schools and districts to be compared; the only difference is that a student will not be punished for not getting a certain score on the exam. Frankly, the MCAS graduation requirement has long been a distraction from what would really improve the Massachusetts public education system. Most of the focus has been on this graduation test (and the only three subject areas that are tested), rather than ensuring all districts have an appropriate course of study that challenges and supports students.

4. Massachusetts Is an Outlier When It Comes to Having a Graduation Exam

Above: (Top) There is a clear correlation between a student's failure rate on MCAS and their socioeconomic status (UMass Donahue Institute Report, 2000). (Bottom) Massachusetts is only one of eight states that still require students to pass a standardized test to graduate (New York is currently in the process of dropping their graduation exams).

Massachusetts is only one of eight states that still requires a graduation exam (down from a high of 28 states in 2010). Any voter needs to ask themselves, why? One of the main motivators for adding a graduation exam was the unfunded No Child Left Behind Act and the funding attached to Race to the Top, which was part of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (neither required graduation exams, but did emphasize standardized testing and many states looked to high-achieving states like Massachusetts for models). However, since then, states have realized that it did not help their students to prevent them from getting a diploma, if they could not pass a standardized test. The data is clear that graduation tests did nothing to lift student achievement but did raise dropout rates. That schools spent a massive amount of resources on the "bubble kids" (giving most resources to students who were just below the passing rate of graduation exams) ignoring support for lower or higher achieving students. Parents, students, and teachers raised concerns that, after Race to the Top, there was too much emphasis on testing. Moreover, states started lowering educational standards to prevent more students from not passing their exams (due to the real high-stakes natures of those exams). One by one, states began to remove their requirements for students to pass standardized test to receive a diploma. Massachusetts should follow their lead. Finally, the passage of this ballot question could open the door for students who completed all graduation requirements in the past, but did not pass MCAS, to receive their diplomas retroactively (which had a major positive impact in other states that ended their graduation exams).

If this ballot question passes, it would have a positive effect on our public school system. It will allow districts to focus more on student improvement than on a few students that are on the borderline of passing a graduation exam. It will allow schools to better support students who are at risk of dropping out of school. It will allow schools to think more holistically on what are the most important requirements for graduation.

Voting "YES" on Question 2 would allow Massachusetts to continue to be a national leader in curriculum and teaching, but add assessment. It would have important positive outcomes for thousands of students each year and ultimately increase opportunity for all students.

Teaching About (Against) White Christian Nationalism

Above: (Top) A man carrying a Bible in front of Trump and anti-government militia flags during the January 6th Insurrection. (Bottom) Civil rights and religious groups have been raising warnings about the rise of white Christian nationalism, such as the Glendale United Methodist Church in Nashville.

What Is White Christian Nationalism?

In a recent article in The History Teacher, Kaylene Stevens and I argued, 

Not all movements were/are just. ... It is crucial that history teachers help students distinguish between movements for justice and movements against justice. Not all people working together to advance shared ideas are working toward goals of fairness or freedom. In fact, some are organized to do the exact opposite. (p 353)

White Christian nationalism is one of those unjust movements.

White Christian nationalism is an ideology that fuses white supremacy, conservative Christianity, and American nationalism/American exceptionalism. White Christian nationalists generally believe that the United States was founded as a white and Christian nation (which directly conflicts with the historical record) and that U.S. laws and institutions should be built on conservative Christian beliefs (which conflicts with the Constitution and Bill of Rights). White Christian nationalists often believe that the U.S. was created by God and is divinely favored. Some demand spiritual warfare (which explains its relationship to domestic terrorism) and believe that Donald Trump was chosen by God to be president and should be immediately returned to power (evident during the January 6th Insurrection). As such, they believe that the country must be "taken back from" non-Christians, people of color, immigrants, and queer people. At its core, it is a particular type of racist (xenophobic and queerphobic) and Christian supremacist thinking (although the mainstream adherents will usually deny that they hold racist beliefs, but surveys show differently) that essentially rejects the pluralism, justice, and democracy of the United States. "The Flag and the Cross: White Christian Nationalism and the Threat to American Democracy" by Philip Gorski and Samuel L. Perry offers a good primer (and you can watch one of Philip Gorski's talks on the topic here), as well as Bradley Onishi's "Preparing for War: The Extremist History of White Christian Nationalism—and What Comes Next."

As a movement, white Christian nationalism has had increased support in recent years, has strongest support among white evangelical Protestants and in rural areas, and gained significant political power within the Republican Party, including its leadership, such as House Speaker Mike Johnson (although he does not use the term to describe himself). It has also found overlap with anti-democratic and far-right groups in recent years. In recent polls, 6 in 10 Americans believed the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation and 45% think it should be a Christian nation (at the same time, large percentages of African Americans, Asian Americans, and Latinos, are concerned about the rise of white Christian nationalism). It is also not purely a U.S. phenomenon, as similar movements exist in Canada and across Europe and have gained political power in Hungary, with Viktor Orbán collaborating with U.S. conservatives, and Poland, which involves a Catholic take on white Christian nationalism.

What Is the History of White Christian Nationalism?

 

Above: (Top) The John Gast painting "American Progress" personifying Manifest Destiny shows an angel-like figure of Columbia bring light to the West and forcing Indigenous people off their land for the advancement of white society. (Bottom) Insurrectionists carried many symbols of white supremacy and Christian nationalism on January 6th, including crosses and Confederate flags.

White Christian nationalism is not a new phenomenon. Instead, similar movements have emerged at various points in American history (and some trace it all the way back to Columbus and later the Doctrine of Discovery). In many ways, movements like these are conservative and reactionary, especially when there are demographic shifts and changing social attitudes. White Christian nationalism certainly was a guiding ideology of the Puritans in Massachusetts Bay Colony, who used settler-colonialism to create a theocracy based on their conservative Protestant teachings (see Cotton Mather specifically); they intentionally used the killing, displacement, and religious conversion of Native peoples to create their ethnonationalist religious colony. In fact, many modern white Christian nationalists use the Puritans (as well as the actual or imagined Christian practices of some of U.S. "founding fathers") as a model and to historically validate their movement. The Second Great Awakening is another area where white supremacy and Christian nationalism re-emerged in American politics and policy. White Christians' participation in Manifest Destiny in the U.S. and Canada and a growing belief that God had given them a continent to establish a government based on their religious teachings and that using violence on Native peoples was justified in making their Christian nations. White Christian nationalist thinking emerged again in the era after the Civil War, which helped justify American imperialism (what Philip Gorski has called "WASP nationalism") and a view that the United States was acting as "God's hand" to spread white and Christianity values and freedom to the rest of the world through empire. 

Some historians have argued that the modern white Christian nationalist movement was born in the 1920s as a reaction to Asian and southern and eastern European immigration, Black migration north, and the changing morality of the time (related, it was a period where the Ku Klux Klan had a re-insurgence with a strongly Christian identity). Later, anti-New Deal campaigns in the 1930s expanded the movement (and created an unusual partnership with corporate America), which was strengthened by anti-communist and segregationist campaigns of the 1950s, and rebranded by conservative television evangelists and others in the 1980s into what became referred to as the "religious right" and gained supporters through the anti-abortion movement (and a more fringe and violent iteration inspired the Oklahoma City Bombing and other vigilante militia groups, including the Christian Patriot Movement). Later, similar ideologies influenced members of the modern Tea Party Movement in the early 21st century. Today, it presents a major threat to American democracy, pluralism, and justice, which has been made clear through the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025. White Christian nationalism also has a precarious relationship with support for Israeli nationalism, based on views related to the end of the world, and regressive views of women's rights (including voting rights) in the U.S. and globally.

Above: (Top) Many segregationists viewed themselves as both American patriots and devout Christians, including at this Ku Klux Klan rally at an Oregon Baptist Church in 1922. (Bottom) A homeowner in Louisiana makes clear their desire for public schools to be centered around religious beliefs (also notice the U.S. flags) in 2018. 

How Has White Christian Nationalism Found Its Way Into Schools?

In recent years, white Christian nationalism has found its way again (as this is not the first time) into public schools, especially through curriculum and book bans. White Christian nationalists have strategically focused on controlling the narratives that are told in public schools (often through political control of school boards and activism by astroturf groups like Moms for Liberty), which includes advocating and, in many cases, mandating that U.S. history be taught as rooted in European and Christian thinking. They justify white settler-colonialism as part of a larger biblical plan and excuse any racial and religious violence as simply common aspects of their eras. The movement has also carefully crafted its language to not raise alarms about its white supremacist and Christian nationalist ideology. Rather, it often uses coded language (especially when it comes to anything related to school curriculum). Instead, it will emphasize that a curriculum is teaching about "western civilization" or "classical education," or use terms such as "American exceptionalism" and "our European past." Moreover,  it often removes references to the American democracy in favor of exclusively using American republic and positions Europeans as delivering civilization to the rest of the world. Those have long been used as codes for "anti-multiculturalism," "white supremacy," and now "white Christian nationalist" curricula.

In recent years, there have been political pushes in several states, including Texas, Florida, North Dakota, and Virginia, to include Bible studies courses in public schools or increase Christian perspectives in curriculum standards starting at the elementary level through high school and incentivizing teacher professional development that has an emphasis on Christianity, conservatism, and western civilization. Some charter schools (independently run schools that receive public funds) have built their educational programming around white Christian nationalist curriculum. Several states education agencies have endorsed PragerU's (which is a rightwing media organization and not a university) videos and curricular materials, which involve anti-Black, anti-Indigenous, anti-LGBTQ, and Christian nationalist propaganda. Conservative groups nationally (such as the rightwing Civic Alliance's American Birthright curriculum standards and the conservative Christian Hillsdale College 1776 history curriculum) have offered alternative curriculum standards and materials based on white Christian nationalist views. Yet, this is also occurring in more liberal states, albeit in more careful and nuanced ways, through conservative groups attempting to influence the writing of state social studies standards or using lawsuits to limit the teaching of certain subjects or affinity spaces for certain students.

 

Above: Adopted by numerous school districts and state education agencies, American Birthright and the Hillsdale 1776 Curriculum are essentially white Christian nationalist propaganda posing as school curriculum.

This is not a new phenomenon. There has been a long history of centering white and Christian nationalist ideologies in the history curriculum. As Kaylene Stevens and I outline the long history of white supremacist influence on history curriculum in our book Teaching History for Justice:  

White supremacy was intentionally built into the original design of ancient history courses. These courses became standard components of North American and European education in the 18th and 19th centuries (Marino, 2010; Morris & Scheidel, 2016), at a time when those nations were engaging in colonialism and later in imperialism. Eurocentric ancient history was used to justify the emerging national boundaries and related nationalism (Hourdakis, 1996; Hourdakis, Calogiannakis, & Chiang, 2018), especially in Western Europe, the United States, and Canada; it was to show that these nations were the heirs to civilization started in Greece and Rome. Moreover, Eurocentric ancient history was used to justify White people’s global power and expansion, as well as assert European and American exceptionalism. For instance, the study of Greek and Roman history, as proof of European superiority, was advocated by Herbert Spencer, who was a lead developer of scientific racism in the late 1800s (Morris & Scheidel, 2016). In the 1980s and 1990s, Eurocentric ancient history again gained popularity and was advocated for by a group of, often politically conservative, scholars and politicians as a way to combat the emergence of multicultural education in the 1960s and 1970s (Dunn, 2008; Nash, Crabtree, & Dunn, 2000). They argued that, for national unity, it was essential that all Americans learn that the U.S. government, and more broadly civilization, was originally founded in Europe and built on a Western heritage and culture (Gagnon, 1998; Ravitch, 1990; Ravitch & Finn, 1987; Stotsky, 2004). (pp. 105-106)

These ideas directly overlap with a white Christian nationalist interpretation of U.S. history and have generally created educational alliances between conservative educational scholars and white conservative Christian political leaders.

Above: Herbert Spencer, a lead intellectual of scientific racism and who coined the term "survival of the fittest," was a white supremacist (although abandoned his Christian beliefs as a teenager) and a major advocate for the teaching of white supremacy in schools through curricula centered on European history.

How Do We Help Students Learn About White Christian Nationalism and the Role that It Has Had in the Past and Present Day?

It is crucial that social studies teachers teach the long history of white Christian nationalism in the United States and ask them to examine the role that it has had in the past and present day. Below are some resources on the history of white Christian nationalism in the United States. 

In examining these sources, teachers may pose the inquiry question: What is the history of white Christian nationalism in the United States? Does it present a major problem for American democracy in the present?

With this, it is very important to clarify that not that not all conservative Christians are white Christian nationalists. White Christian nationalism, as I defined earlier, is a very specific movement that draws on Christian supremacy and white supremacy, and advocates for a Christian and white U.S. state. Many Christians hold conservative political views without a belief that the U.S. should be a Christian government and that whites are a superior racial group. Moreover, many Christian denominations have explicit teachings for racial justice and religious pluralism (not to mention a strong Christian tradition within the African American community that has long united Christian thinking with social justice). Granted, some white conservative Christians are becoming increasingly influenced by or have found themselves unknowingly aligned with white Christian nationalism (raising concerns among many Christian groups, including some members of the United Methodist Church, Episcopal Church, Roman Catholic Church, Baptist religious leaders, the group Christians Against Christian Nationalism and others). [In full disclosure, I am Catholic and a Polish American, so have seen some of this white Christian nationalist thinking during visits to Poland and among people I grew up with who are gravitating to a white nationalist or fascist view of Catholicism that some call postliberalism or the fringe conservative group Opus Dei, which has ties to Project 2025 and incoming vice president J.D. Vance.]

"The Roots of Christian Nationalism Go Back Further Than You Think" by Robert P. Jones (TIME Magazine)

"White Christian Nationalism: The Deep Story Behind the Capitol Insurrection" by Philip Gorski (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

"Tracing the Rise of Christian Nationalism, from Trump to the Ala. Supreme Court" by Terri Gross and Brad Onishi (National Public Radio)

"The Dispossessed? Lived History and White Christian Nationalism" by Lauren R. Kerby (Berkeley Center; Georgetown University)

"How I Became a Christian Nationalist" by Kenneth Woodward (The Washington Post)

"An ‘Imposter Christianity’ Is Threatening American Democracy" by John Blake (CNN)

"The Mundane History of White Christian Nationalism" by Neil J. Young (Religion & Politics)

"Preparing for War: The Extremist History of White Christian Nationalism and What Comes Next" by Melissa Harris-Perry (WNYC)

"White Christian Nationalists Want More Than Just Political Power And Washington, D.C., Looms Large in their Struggle" by Lauren R. Kerby (The Atlantic) 

"White Nationalism Remains Major Concern for Voters of Color" by Gabriel R. Sanchez, Keon L. Gilbert, and Carly Bennett (Brookings)

Teaching About the Land Back Movement

Above: Sogorea Te’ Land Trust, a women-led Bay Area collective working to return land to Indigenous peoples celebrates a recent City of Berkeley vote to return sacred land to the Lisjan Nation.

Last week, the City of Berkeley voted to rematriate a portion of land to the Lisjan Nation (Ohlone peoples), which follows the lead of the City of Oakland. The West Berkeley Shellmound was likely the first Native settlement in the area and dates back 5,700 years. On the other side of the continent, people who are the descendants of the first settler-colonists in New England are raising funds to buy and return local land to the Nipmuc peoples and members of the Hassanamisco Band of the Nipmuc are advocating for the rematriation of the Lampson Brook Farm in Western Massachusetts.

Decolonization is not a metaphor; the Land Back Movement is "literally" working to return Native homelands and ensure that the U.S. and Canadian governments respect treaties and recognize when treaties were unjust with Indigenous nations. 

Above: No DAPL protests in 2016.

The Land Back Movement gained momentum during the Dakota Access pipeline protests/Water Protectors Movement with the term "Land Back" being coined in 2017 by Kainai tribal citizen Aaron Tailfeathers (the hashtag #LandBack has become popular on social media). Yet, the movement for Indigenous people to have their land returned to them is as old as the first taking of Native lands by settler-colonists. For instance, in 1659, Nipmuc leader Tantamous legally defended his land from white settlers in Massachusetts Bay Colony who attempted to take it.  

While the term repatriation is often used to described the returning of someone to their home country, Indigenous women activists have coined the term rematriation to describe the returning of the stolen sacred sites to the mother. As a result, a growing number of governments (mostly at the local level, such as the City of Boston returning the Mattapan Rhyolite Quarry to the Massachusett people) but also including some federal decisions and private citizens are finding ways to return land to local Native nations and tribes (there is also a similar movement to return land to descendants of enslaved Black people and Black families that have had their land taken by the government). Yet, much of this work is being done by Native nations and tribal governments, who are buying back their own lands (including the Stockbridge-Munsee Band of Mohicans here in Massachusetts). This post was created to help give social studies resources to teach about the past related to this present-day justice movement and consider potential ways that governments may start to right the wrongs.

Above: Native protesters outside Mt. Rushmore during Donald Trump's visit in 2020. 

Teaching About the Land Back Movement

In having students learn about the Land Back Movement, one potential inquiry question to ask is: "How should the government return stolen land to Indigenous peoples?" Students could read about the history of treaties and Native sovereignty in the U.S., research different options of rematriation, and design potential plans for the national, state, or local governments. 

Native lands have been rematriated in several different ways: land title purchases by nations and tribes, donations from private landowners, transfers from land conservancies, or local, state, or federal legislation/actions. For instance, students may argue that cities and towns should return municipal land to local nations and tribes. Other students may argue that the federal government should return land to local nations and tribes through expansion of the current Interior Department program. Yet, other students may argue that descendants of settler-colonists should return land to Native peoples and donate money to local nations and tribes, so they can buy back land. Still, some students may conceive new ways to seek land justice for local nation and tribes.

Below (and linked above) are some resources that students could examine to help answer that questions.

Resources on Native Sovereignty and Broken Treaties

Key Vocabulary: Teaching & Learning About Native Americans (National Museum of the American Indian)

Native Land Digital (Indigenous territories, treaties, and languages mapping tool)

Nation to Nations (National Museum of the American Indian)

Tribal Sovereignty: History and the Law (Native American Caucus: California State Legislature) 

Tribal Nations & the United States: An Introduction (National Congress of American Indians)

Histories of Indigenous Sovereignty in Action: What is it and Why Does it Matter? (Organization of American Historians)

Why Treaties Matter (Minnesota Humanities Center) 

Broken Treaties With Native American Tribes: Timeline (History Channel)

In 1868, Two Nations Made a Treaty, the U.S. Broke It and Plains Indian Tribes are Still Seeking Justice (Smithsonian Magazine)

Indigenous Peoples Day Comes Amid a Reckoning Over Colonialism and Calls for Return of Native Land (The Conversation)

Resources on Current Rematriation Efforts 

The Land Back Movement Unravels Manifest Destiny (Sierra Club)

Rematriation Resource Guide (Sogorea Te’ Land Trust)

Returning the Land (The Fix) 

Rematriation  Returning the Sacred to the Mother (Rematriation/Haudenosaunee)

Rematriation Through Sustainable Food And Economic Systems (Eastern Woodlands Rematriation) 

How Returning Lands to Native Tribes Is Helping Protect Nature (Yale Environment 360)

Interior Department Land Buy-Back Program (U.S. Department of the Interior)

Land Recovery (Indian Land Tenure Foundation) 

 

Want to know more? Consider watching this short documentary by NDN Collective on the work of Lakota and other Indigenous activists fighting to have land returned to the Oceti Sakowin Nation.