Oregon tribes emphasize community, language and culture in early childhood education – OregonLive.com

Report on Tribal Early Childhood Education in Oregon and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: Advancing SDG 4 and SDG 11 Through Culturally-Rooted Education

In northwestern Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde are advancing a model of early childhood education that directly aligns with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). At the Shawash-iliʔi Skul, a tribal immersion school, preschoolers are educated in both English and the traditional Chinuk Wawa language. This initiative is a significant effort to achieve SDG 4 (Quality Education) by providing inclusive and equitable early childhood development, while simultaneously working towards SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) by actively safeguarding the tribe’s intangible cultural heritage.

The program emphasizes a holistic approach, integrating standard academics with cultural traditions. This model seeks to provide a strong educational foundation and foster a deep sense of identity, addressing key targets within the SDGs related to cultural diversity and inclusive learning environments.

Challenges in Achieving Equitable Access and Institutional Integrity (SDG 10 & SDG 16)

Systemic Barriers to Funding and Resources

Tribal nations in Oregon have historically encountered significant obstacles in accessing state funding for early education, a situation that highlights systemic issues targeted by SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). The state’s previous system routed financial support through 16 geographic hubs, creating bureaucratic hurdles that disproportionately affected tribal communities.

• Access to resources was inconsistent across the state, with some tribes facing unwelcoming or uncooperative regional hubs.
• The process created barriers that hindered the ability of sovereign tribal nations to implement culturally-specific educational programs.
• These inequalities prevented the full realization of SDG 4.2, which calls for universal access to quality early childhood development and pre-primary education.

The Pursuit of Sovereign and Inclusive Institutions

An attempt to rectify these issues through the creation of a dedicated Tribal Early Learning Hub in 2021 failed to meet the needs of the tribes. The initiative collapsed in 2023 amid concerns that it undermined tribal sovereignty by requiring funds to be channeled through a third party rather than directly to the nations. This struggle reflects the principles of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), which advocates for effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions. The tribes’ decision to reject the hub model in favor of a more direct funding mechanism demonstrates a commitment to ensuring responsive, participatory, and representative decision-making (SDG 16.7).

Policy Developments and Financial Landscape

Establishment of the Tribal Early Learning Fund

Following extensive discussions among tribal leaders, a new Tribal Early Learning Fund was established with bipartisan support. This fund represents a significant step forward in recognizing that tribal nations are best positioned to design and implement early learning systems rooted in their unique languages, cultures, and values. This development is a practical application of SDG 16, fostering strong institutions that respect self-determination.

Funding Shortfalls and Their Impact on SDG Targets

Despite this policy victory, the fund’s initial allocation presents a major challenge. Lawmakers approved approximately $700,000 for the 2025-27 biennium, a figure substantially lower than the $4.75 million recommended. This budget is sufficient only to maintain current services, not to expand them. Furthermore, budget cuts to other state programs that support tribal children, such as Preschool Promise and the Equity Fund, threaten to reverse progress.

• The reduced funding directly impacts the ability of tribes to meet the growing demand for early childhood services and address infrastructure needs, such as constructing dedicated education facilities.
• These financial constraints impede progress towards SDG 4, particularly the goal of eliminating educational disparities for indigenous children (SDG 4.5).
• The cuts undermine the state’s capacity to support programs that have proven effective in providing equitable education to tribal children.

The Indigenous Educational Model: A Framework for Sustainable Development

Core Components and Objectives

The educational model at Shawash-iliʔi Skul provides a clear framework for achieving sustainable development through education. The curriculum is designed to build a strong foundation for lifelong success while preserving cultural identity, directly contributing to SDG 4.7 (education for sustainable development and appreciation of cultural diversity) and SDG 11.4 (safeguarding cultural heritage).

1. Language Immersion: Revitalizing and normalizing the use of Chinuk Wawa in daily life.
2. Cultural and Environmental Education: Teaching children about their history, natural resources, and the importance of community.
3. Identity Formation: Rooting children in a strong sense of who they are and where they come from, fostering pride in their heritage.
4. Academic Preparedness: Providing high-quality early education to address historical academic disparities faced by Indigenous students in state metrics.

Outcomes and Future Aspirations

The program has already demonstrated positive outcomes, including an increase in the use of Chinuk Wawa within the community. Education leaders report that providing culturally-grounded early education gives children a “fighting chance to really be successful” and addresses systemic challenges in the public school system. The primary aspiration is to expand these services to eliminate waitlists and ensure every child in the community has access. Fulfilling this vision is critical not only for preserving culture but for achieving the full promise of SDG 4 by ensuring no child is left behind.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 4: Quality Education

   The entire article is centered on the provision of early childhood education for Indigenous children in Oregon. It discusses the creation of immersion schools like Shawash-iliʔi Skul, the challenges in funding and administration, and the goal of setting children up for academic success. This directly aligns with the core mission of SDG 4 to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education.

2. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   The article highlights the systemic barriers and inequalities faced by Oregon’s tribal nations in accessing state resources for education. It describes how the initial system of geographic hubs was not equitable for all tribes and the subsequent efforts to create a dedicated fund that recognizes tribal sovereignty. This addresses SDG 10’s aim to reduce inequality within and among countries by empowering and promoting the inclusion of all, including Indigenous peoples.

3. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

   The narrative details the complex partnership between the state of Oregon and the nine tribal nations. It covers the failed attempt to create a Tribal Early Learning Hub and the new collaborative effort that resulted in the Tribal Early Learning Fund. This reflects the principles of SDG 17, which emphasizes the need for effective partnerships between governments and different community groups to achieve sustainable development.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 4: Quality Education

  • Target 4.2: “By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education.” The article’s focus is on providing preschool services, such as those at Shawash-iliʔi Skul, to tribal children to give them a “fighting chance to really be successful” in their future schooling.
  • Target 4.5: “By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including… indigenous peoples…” The article explicitly addresses the educational challenges of Indigenous students in Oregon, who have “historically struggled in both attendance and on state reading and math tests,” and the efforts to provide them with equitable access to quality early education.
  • Target 4.7: “By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including… appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development.” The immersion school’s curriculum, which teaches the Chinuk Wawa language, tribal history, and cultural traditions, is a direct implementation of this target. The goal is to build a strong sense of identity rooted in their heritage.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  • Target 10.2: “By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all… irrespective of… ethnicity…” The creation of the Tribal Early Learning Fund is described as a move to empower tribes, recognizing that they “are best positioned to design early learning systems that are rooted in their language, their culture and their values.” This promotes their inclusion and sovereignty in educational matters.
  • Target 10.3: “Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating… discriminatory… policies and practices…” The article describes how the previous system of geographic hubs created barriers and unequal access to funding for some tribes. The new fund is a legislative action designed to create a more equitable policy and ensure equal opportunity for all nine tribal nations.

• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

  • Target 17.17: “Encourage and promote effective public… and civil society partnerships…” The story of the Tribal Early Learning Hub and the subsequent Tribal Early Learning Fund is a case study in the evolution of a public partnership between the state government (Department of Early Learning and Care) and civil society (the nine tribal nations). The article also mentions inter-tribal collaboration, such as “opening up training opportunities to all tribes,” as a way to maximize resources.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, several quantitative and qualitative indicators are mentioned or implied in the article:

• Number of children served: The article states that “145 tribal children” were supported by the Equity Fund and Preschool Promise in 2023-24. This is a direct indicator of access to early childhood education (Target 4.2).
• Funding levels: Specific financial figures are provided, such as the “$2 million” for the failed hub and the “$700,000” allocated to the new Tribal Early Learning Fund. These figures serve as indicators of the financial commitment to tribal early education (Target 10.3).
• Educational infrastructure: The article mentions the goal to “build a separate building for the education department” and the plan to open “at least one more classroom.” The number of dedicated classrooms and facilities is an indicator of capacity (Target 4.2).
• Demand for services: The statement, “We’ve never not had a wait list for early childhood services,” is a qualitative indicator of unmet demand, highlighting the gap between service availability and community needs (Target 4.2).
• Educational outcomes: The reference to state data showing Indigenous students “have historically struggled in both attendance and on state reading and math tests” serves as a baseline indicator for measuring future improvements in educational equity (Target 4.5).
• Language revitalization: The observation that “more people using Chinuk Wawa as the immersion school grows” is a qualitative indicator of progress in preserving and promoting Indigenous culture and language through education (Target 4.7).
• Policy structure: The shift from a state-controlled hub model where tribes couldn’t “access the money directly” to a fund that allows each tribe to “set their own early education path” is a qualitative indicator of increased tribal sovereignty and empowerment (Target 10.2).

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: oregonlive.com