Against all Odds 1

Research in Story Form: A Narrative Account of How One Person Made a Difference against all Odds

Elizabeth M. Delacruz Professor of Art Education University of Illinois Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Florida Online Masters Degree Program in Art Education

edelacruz88@gmail.com

October 2011 working draft for: K. M. Miraglia, K. M., & C. Smilan, C. (Eds.). Inquiry in Action: Paradigms, Methodologies and Perspectives in Art Education Research. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.

Running Head/Short Title: Against all Odds Key words: narrative research, Indian mascots, Charlene Teters, white privilege

Against all Odds 2 Abstract

This chapter describes how narrative research functions as a form of engaged scholarship within a community practice. The community of practice of interest is art education, although I note that art education overlaps with several other communities of practice (artists, art historians, educators and developmental psychologists, museum educators, child care providers, therapists, civil rights workers, community leaders, etc.). Following a brief description of some of the goals, beliefs, and methods of narrative research, I share an account of my own research and work on an issue I have engaged since 1998. In my account, I explain why I came to believe that the use of Indian mascots in US non-Native American Schools is a practice that needs to end, and how I acted upon that belief in my efforts to persuade the NAEA to address this issue. The third section of this chapter is devoted to the individual who made a difference against all odds, Native American artist and educator, Charlene Teters, who through her own research, storytelling, art making, social/political interventions, and courage, changed national discourse and understandings about this issue. The accounts shared in this chapter are given as stories, interspersed with reflections and critical commentaries. My conclusion considers how the power of stories may inform and shape our overlapping communities of practice.

Against all Odds 3

This chapter describes how narrative research functions as a form of engaged scholarship within a community practice. The community of practice of interest is art education, although I note that art education overlaps with several other communities of practice (artists, art historians, educators and developmental psychologists, museum educators, child care providers, therapists, civil rights workers, community leaders, etc.). Following a brief description of some of the goals, beliefs, and methods of narrative research, I share an account of my own research and work on an issue I have engaged since 1998. In my account, I explain why I came to believe that the use of Indian mascots in US non-Native American Schools is a practice that needs to end, and how I acted upon that belief in my efforts to persuade the NAEA to address this issue. The one person who made a difference, mentioned in the title of this chapter, is not I, however. It is Native American artist and educator, Charlene Teters, who through her own research, storytelling, art making, social/political interventions, and courage, changed national discourse and understandings about this issue. It is fitting then that the third section of this chapter is devoted to Charlene Teters. The accounts shared in this chapter are given as stories, interspersed with reflections and critical commentaries. My conclusion considers how the power of stories may inform and shape our overlapping communities of practice.

Research as Storytelling All human communications are a form of storytelling about some aspect of the world (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990). Communications scholar Walter Fisher defines storytelling, or narration, as symbolic action, words, or deeds, that have sequence and meaning for those who live, create, or interpret them (1987). Stories are embedded in our myths, imagery, and rituals.

Against all Odds 4 They embody the cultural histories and aspirations of individuals, communities, and even nations. Stories reinforce communitarian values (Campbell, 1949). They provide external order, a cultural script, and lasting evidence of aspects of life that are inherently fleeting and intangible (Bruner, 1991; Bruner, 2004; Kramp, 2004). Cultural anthropologist Ellen Dissanayake observes that when enriched and expressed in heightened and evocative ways, our rituals of personal and cultural expression make special that which we most value and want to communicate to others (Dissanayake, 2003). Our rituals bind us to one another in a live lived together, informing, shaping, and solidifying who we are and what we aspire to become. Our rituals of research take place in varying ways for differing purposes, and in a multitude of different kinds of sites. Governmental, scientific, commercial, religious, medical, and educational institutions gather, analyze, and disseminate information in efforts to understand, predict, and sometimes even control human populations. Community groups, civic organizations, and professional associations also gather and utilize data to advance their goals. Individuals, groups, and institutions ask questions about some aspect of concern, look systematically into the matter, and then share and act upon their findings. The research report, in almost every case, is an explanation about some phenomenon, often accompanied by a call to action based on that explanation. Long understood as a systematic search for knowledge and understanding, research has always been a form of story telling, that is, a way of sharing inquiries and discoveries in narrative form. Like stories, research is shaped by human aspirations, grounded in their particular cultural and historical contexts, and shared within and across communities of practice. A community of practice, in briefest terms, is an organized, multi-layered group of affiliated people engaged in similar disciplinary or professional work (Wenger, 2006). The profession of art

Against all Odds 5 education, and the National Art Education Association (NAEA) in particular, is my primary community of practice. I learn from, contribute to, and conduct my work (research, teaching, and public engagement) utilizing the goals, standards, knowledge, skills, and tools acquired through my affiliation with other art educators, many of whom are members of the NAEA. As a multilayered and highly varied group of individuals with diverse interests and agendas, we also cohere around a set of common aims. And we read, apply, conduct, and share our research as a key aspect of our affiliation with one another. In other words, we learn from and are shaped by the professional practices and insights offered in formal and informal research reports, oftentimes with great generosity, by colleagues. Our research methods are as varied as we are. This chapter is about narrative research. Firmly aligned with a post-positivistic stance, narrative research emerged in the later part of the last century as both a new and an old form of inquiry, borrowing and blending ancient oral traditions and cultural history writing with contemporary post-Marxist qualitative inquiry methods. Now applied across a wide variety of contemporary disciplines in the humanities and social sciences, narrative inquiry and writing (also referred to as narratology) may include biography and autobiography, life writing, phenomenology, introspection, life stories, autoethnography, memory-writing, ethnopsychology, narrative interviews, portraiture, selfportraiture, a/r/tography, ethnohistory, revisionist and feminist histories, case study, oral history, and folklore (Casey, 1995-1996; Connelly & Clandinin, 1990; Kramp, 2004). Like much of contemporary qualitative research, narrative research embraces, in varying degrees the following values, inquiry strategies, and reporting protocols (Barone, 2007; Coulter & Smith, 2009):

Rejection of the ideology of scientism with its canons of objectivity

Against all Odds 6 Abandonment of the search for a grand totalizing narrative Creative blending of cultural, existential, political, and postmodern perspectives Reliance on a variety of naturalistic documentary, data collection, and inquiry strategies Desire to excavate and illuminate hidden or marginalized aspects of human experience Heightened attention to the multi-dimensional contexts in which experience is grounded Interest in social interactions; concern for unequal power relations Acknowledgement of the importance of the conscious subjectivity of the researcher Privileging of the voice of the researcher and/or the subjects/participants as co-narrators Writings convey the holistic qualities of experience Use of evocative language, poetic devices, and metaphoric thinking Attention to the literary quality of the writing itself

Narrative research in education encompasses a vast range of genres and interests. These include studies of teachers lives, studies of teachers thinking, teachers stories, classroom stories, school ethnographies, curriculum studies, educational criticism, critical race studies, feminist critiques, teacher-student collaborative inquiries, teachers critical autoethnographies, and teachers phenomenological investigations into the nature and meaning of their work (Barone, 2007; Casey, 1995-1996; Coulter & Smith, 2009). Primary data for narrative research in education include first hand experiences, memories, personal diaries, observational field notes, journal records, interview transcripts, photographs, audio and video recordings, stories and observations shared by others, letters, autobiographical writings, and a plethora of school documents such as curriculum frameworks, mission statements, evaluation plans and instruments, lesson plans, instructional handouts, newsletters, books, advertisements, web sites,

Against all Odds 7 parental and community member communications, all kinds of student artifacts and production in other words, just about anything associated with teaching and learning, institutions, people, and contexts. Finally, narrative research is authentic in that it neither manipulates the natural setting nor obscures or marginalizes the voice of the researcher. It is holistic in that it holds in highest regard the embeddedness of both the actors and the acts of inquiry in their multilayered network of interhuman relationships. It is empowering insofar as it brings to the foreground a critical consciousness of the hidden consequences of power imbalances and social inequalities within these interhuman relationships, both giving voice and conferring agency to both the narrator (researcher) and the subjects of the research. In the narrative research tradition, Id now like to tell you a story. It is in part a story about how the NAEA came to formally engage the issue of Indian mascots in US schools. But its really the story about how a painting student at the University of Illinois started a national movement and brought to our attention as art educators a great social injustice and a gross form of miseducation of American children.

How the NAEA Came to Engage the Issue of Indian Mascots In the late 1980s Native American artist Charlene Teters was recruited to come to the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) to study art. Charlene and her children were shocked to see University of Illinois' Chief Illiniwek perform at a UIUC basketball game, and the variety of comical caricatures of Native Americans appearing all over campus and throughout the Champaign-Urbana community. Charlene spoke out, calling The Chief and its associated images and rituals racist and miseducational, and she asked the university to stop

Against all Odds 8 this practice. The officials of the university were not persuaded, but agreed to look into the issue. A growing number of faculty, students, and citizens gradually joined Charlene in her requests. At the same time, a large number of equally vocal individuals and groups also opposed removing the Chief as the mascot of the university. Amidst threats, police intimidation, and willful ignorance of those she encountered, Charlene persevered based on the assertion "We are people, not Mascots". I became faculty member at the University of Illinois in 1988 and had just gotten tenure as the Indian mascot issue was ramping up. Although I was aware of the brewing Indian mascot issue at UIUC, I gave it little consideration until I heard Charlene speak at a UIUC Faculty Senate meeting in 1998. (I was a member of the Senate at that time.) Charlene was asking the Senate to endorse a resolution calling for the retirement of Chief Illiniwek. University of Illinois police were visibly present at this meeting. I asked one of the officers if they expected violence, and was politely informed that they were present just in case trouble erupts. At this meeting, the Faculty Senate voted 97-29 to officially ask the UI Board of Trustees to retire the Chief. In response, the Trustees spent $315,000 further "studying the issue", but decided to keep Chief Illiniwek for 9 more years (Werth, 2007). In 2007, the University of Illinois Board of Trustees finally retired The Chief, realizing that UI would not prevail in court against a 2006 NCAA ban on hosting post-season athletic events (including bowl games) at universities with offensive racist mascots.1 That was the short version of Charlenes history with the Indian Mascot issue, woven in with my own. A longer version of Charlenes history with this issue appears in the following section, and still longer versions appear on Charlenes website, in her art, lectures, writings, and interventions, and in the many articles and documentaries that have been written about Charlene

Against all Odds 9 over the past 20 years. Working at the UIUC whilst all of this was taking place, I wrote an essay about Charlene and the Indian mascot issue. That essay was published in the NAEA journal Art Education in 2003. As I reflected on Charlenes story and assertions, I recounted in my essay to Art Education that Indian mascots, logos, and caricatures had always been part of my visual landscape. I made Indian dioramas in grade school. I watched the Lone Ranger and Tonto on television. I made Indian artifacts" to trade with other Brownie Scouts at a summer camp in Wisconsin named after some long-departed Indian tribe. I studied traditional Native American art in graduate school and I earned academic degrees from two universities that had Indian mascots, the University of Illinois and Florida State University. I was teaching at the University of Illinois as the Indian mascot issue gained momentum, but I was uninvolved for the first few years. Teters' characterization of "us" as racists seemed too harsh, and I was quite sure that we were not racists. But I was moved by Charlenes eloquent and focused speech to the UIUC Faculty Senate in 1998. She spoke about her life experiences as a contemporary Native American, and she talked most passionately about her children. The more I studied the Indian mascot problem and the more I listened, the more I learned about racism in the US. I had to personalize Teters's story in order to understand her words. I was a mother now. I thought about my own children and the many children that I have taught over the years. I considered how Native Americans' pleas to eliminate this practice were met with such indifference and intense resistance. I wondered why, in denial of compelling arguments against, this use of Indian mascots persisted. I initially concluded that the practice was not intentionally racist and that Indian mascots were just too much fun to give up, too normal to abandon. But such a realization was inadequate by

Against all Odds 10 itself. As I further I researched this issue, I began to filter my understandings through writings about White privilege and Critical Race Theory.2 It wasnt just that Indian mascots were fun, or that White people in the US loved Indian culture. And it wasnt just that this was a UIUC tradition a nostalgic, sentimental honoring of Native American courage and spirit. Rather this practice was a classic example of centuries old institutionalized White privilege,3 resistance to change, and what Native American scholar and educator Cornel Pewewardy identified in 1998 as disconscious racism. I wrote about White privilege in my 2003 essay Art Education as well, realizing that I myself was a beneficiary of White privilege to the detriment of Native Americans. And at the end of the essay, I called for a NAEA resolution supporting the elimination of race-based mascots in US educational institutions. Over the next few years, I asked for and easily gained support for this resolution from the NAEA Early Childhood Affiliate Group, the NAEA Women's Caucus, the NAEA Social Theory Caucus, and the NAEA Higher Education Division. In April 2009 I presented "A Resolution Calling for the Elimination of Race-Based Mascots in American Educational Institutions" (see Appendix A) to the National Art Education Association Delegates Assembly. Through one of the regional VPs of the NAEA, I shared in advance of the Delegates Assembly meeting a resource document about the Indian mascot. This resource document explicated the rationale for the resolution, talked about the harmful effects of Indian mascots on Native Americans, and contained a hyperlinked list of similar resolutions that had already been passed by Tribal Councils and highly respected national scholarly and educational associations. I was anxious but hopeful that at the 2009 meeting of Delegates my request for passage of this resolution would be met with understanding and support amongst my fellow art teachers.

Against all Odds 11 At the meeting of the NAEA Delegates Assembly, through a questionable4 Roberts Rules of Order procedural maneuver, the Delegates voted 42 to 20 not to even discuss the race-based mascot issue. The resolution was, for all practical purposes, dead in 2009. I was not sure if the NAEA Delegates had taken the time to read the resource document I provided. I realized in retrospect that I had gone into this meeting ill prepared for the task. But even worse, I had the naivet and audacity to think that this was something I could or should be doing on my own. I still knew that the issue and the time were right for the NAEA. I now had to rethink the strategy. Over the following year I asked several other art educators to join me in the goal of passing a NAEA resolution calling for the elimination of race-based mascots in US educational institutions.5 I specifically asked well respected individuals who were knowledgeable about invested in issues of social justice and critical theory studies in art education.6 Wanting a broadly based coalition with numerous informed voices and viewpoints, I sought individuals from diverse scholarly, cultural, racial, age, and geographic backgrounds, women and men, gay and straight, artists, educators, and administrators for help. Importantly, some of these individuals needed to be Native American. Now working with a rainbow coalition of nationally respected art educators, artists, and Native American consultants, the original 2009 Resolution, previously modeled after numerous resolutions already passed by countless organizations and councils, was significantly modified into much softened 2010 Position Statement Regarding the Use of Indian Mascots in nonNative American Educational Institutions. Whereas the original 2009 Resolution boldly called Indian mascots racist and called for the complete elimination of this practice, the revised 2010 Position Statement asserted that some individuals find race-based mascots problematic, asked

Against all Odds 12 that teachers encourage school districts with Indian mascots to engage in conversations with Native Americans about these mascots, and that they be proactive in helping their school districts design new mascots. We also revised and expanded the Resource Document (Delacruz et al., 2010) explaining the issue. We provided more extensive background information about Native Americans; connected the mascot initiative to our National Visual Arts Standards, the NAEA Constitution, Mission, and Strategic Plan, and to the official theme of the 2010 annual conference: Social Justice. And we expanded the still growing list of respected national and state organizations, agencies, scholarly and educational associations, health care organizations, and Tribal Councils who concurred that Indian mascots were harmful to children, to Native Americans, and grossly miseducational to non-Native Americans. We vetted our proposed Position Statement and the supporting Resource Document through a newly formed NAEA Platform Working Group, headed at that time by regional NAEA VP Dennis Inhulsen.7 I cant say that I was entirely satisfied with the compromised and much weakened NAEA Position Statement we all agreed to, but it was abundantly clear that this was the very best we could hope for. In my April 14, 2010 presentation to the NAEA Delegates Assembly, I changed my presentation strategy as well (from the previous year). I was given 6 minutes in 2010 to present the proposed Position Statement. I made no assumptions this time about whether or not the Resource Document we prepared and shared in advance of the meeting had been read by the Delegates. During my 6 minutes I showed contemporary Native American art and photographs of Native American artists (about 30 images) as I read excerpts from the National Visual Arts Standards, the NAEA Strategic Plan, and the NAEA Constitution. My spoken text excerpts were direct quotes from these documents. They articulated our beliefs as a professional

Against all Odds 13 community about cultural diversity, human dignity, and teachers ethical responsibilities to teach accurately and to ensure that all children are treated with respect. Toward the end of my slide presentation to the Delegates, I also showed a variety of disturbing and unambiguously racist images of people from diverse racial groups, including but not limited to Indian mascot images and caricatures of Native Americans in common use in US schools. And I asked as these images were shown, How is it that in a 21st century democratic multi-cultural society, our schools create and proliferate images of an historically oppressed, federally recognized, and currently our most at-risk racial group as comical, large-nosed, bucktoothed, scantily-clad, tomahawk-wielding savages? and How is it that students parodies of our Native American brothers and sisters racial features, culture, and religion are actually encouraged in US schools today? Before I share the outcome of the Delegates vote at this meeting, it is useful to also know that for the 2010 annual convention NAEA had changed their process of presentation and voting at Delegates Assembly meetings. Under the leadership of then NAEA VP Dennis Inhulsen, the new process included an open forum poster session in which Delegates could write comments on large poster sized craft paper tablets, and talk to presenters face to face, informally. The vote would occur following this opportunity for conversations. Many of the Delegates who spoke to me during this session talked about fearing loosing their jobs if they raised controversial issues in their home districts. They also talked about the difficult working conditions they were experiencing, their lowered budgets, lay offs in their districts, and a general lack of respect and support for art education in the first place. I always responded to the second concern first, that building support for art education in schools across the country is our number one priority. I then replied that they should never jeopardize their jobs for this or any

Against all Odds 14 single issue, but I suggested that they might be able to work behind the scenes and even under the radar screen to begin to study the Mascot issue and identify others who are also concerned in their school districts. My point was and remains today that together we need to work on these issues from within the system. We just cannot do any of this alone. Those were lessons I learned from my research about Charlene Teters. On April 15, 2010 the NAEA Delegates Assembly passed by a vote of 52 to10 the proposed NAEA Position Statement Regarding the use of Race-based Mascots in Educational Institutions (See Appendix B). Right after their vote, the Delegates gave themselves and the newly accepted Position Statement a standing ovation. On April 18, 2010, the NAEA Board of Directors on unanimously passed (12 to 0) this Position Statement. The NAEA, our community of practice, now stands with Charlene Teters and the hundreds of scholarly and educational associations agencies, health care agencies, governmental agencies, religious organizations, and Native American Tribal Councils that maintain that the use of Indian mascots in non-Native educational institutions is a potentially harmful practice needs to be changed.8

Charlene Teters, Against all Odds! Charlene Teters is a member of the Spokane Nation. She grew up in the city of Spokane, Washington, a place that was built up around the original Spokane village tribal site. She earned her BFA at the College of Santa Fe. While in Santa Fe, Charlene was invited to come to the University of Illinois to study painting. The then chair of the UIUC Painting Department flew to New Mexico explicitly for the purpose or recruiting Native Americans to the School of Art and Design at UIUC. At that time, Chief Illiniwek was a 75-year-old "tradition" at the UrbanaChampaign campus, the official University of Illinois mascot, and a registered trademark of the

Against all Odds 15 university. During halftime at varsity home games, an athletic White male, barefooted and dressed in full Lakota Sioux Regalia, including a headdress made of eagle feathers,9 and orange and blue face paint, does his interpretation of a Sioux Fancy Dance to the Marching Illini band's "Indian" tom-tom medley. It was here that Charlene Teters and her children first saw the University's team mascot. Charlene recounted her experience at the University of Illinois in her 1988 presentation to the UI Faculty Senate, sharing her reasons for opposing Indian mascots, and Chief Illiniwek in particular.

When I first arrived here 10 years ago it was with a great deal of excitement. Was honored to be here amongst you I came full of dreams. But what I found was a community permeated with Indian concoctions: a campus bar with a neon sign, HOME OF THE DRINKING ILLINI; a sorority's MISS ILLINI SQUAW contest; fraternity brothers wearing Colored paper headdresses to go to the bar to drink, and act out negative stereotypes of Indians. My dream turned to a nightmare... This ignorance is our biggest enemy and this enemy seeks to silence and deny the truth... The very presence of 20th century Indian people challenge the ignorance, and your students are arrogant about their ignorance of Native Americans and their history... This issue is much larger than the University of Illinois and "Chief Illiniwek... We are not mascots or fetishes to be worn by the dominant society. We are human beings. (Teters, 1998, para 5)

In a 2000 interview with the Rebecca Johns for the National Education Association journal, Thought and Action, Charlene shared her shock at the nature and extensiveness of the disparaging images of Indians present throughout the university and the wider community,

Against all Odds 16 Everywhere you could possibly print the caricature, it was thereon posters, on Coke cans, on peoples cars, on businesses, on toilet paper (Johns, 2011, p. 122). Charlene also recalled, It was really frightening to find ourselves in this place where they ridiculed and humiliated Native people so openly, and so unchallenged for so many years. This prejudice seemed so invisible and unnoticed by anyone, even other people of color, that these caricatures didnt seem to be out of the norm (Johns, 2000, p. 124). Charlene also shared that when she raised the issue with the individuals who recruited her, she was told, Well, you cant do anything about it, so just keep your mouth shut, get your degree, and then get out of here (Johns, 2000, p. 123). One of the three Native students who were recruited to UIUC with Charlene left the university after only two months here. Charlene, on the other hand, took action, challenging UIs legitimacy in its use of this mascot. She stood outside the UIUC football stadium with a sign that read, We are humans, not mascots, and demanded that UIUC stop using eagle feathers (a sacred symbol in several Native cultures) in the Chief Illiniwek headdress. That's when the real battle began for Charlene, "My phone would not stop ringing ...phone calls day and night, and the hate messages, some hate messages directed specifically at me and my children" (Johns, 2000, p. 126). Charlene began to fear for her safety and the safety of her children, "My son was a high school student. He was 16. He was picked up by the police a number of times, and it was harassment. They would drive him back home. The police were saying, we know where you live, we know who your kids are" (Johns, 2000, p. 126). Charlene remembers that newspaper articles ridiculing her began to appear in the Daily Illini, the campus newspaper. By this time, Charlene was thinking of leaving UIUC. In the midst of all of this Charlene received a phone call from Kenneth Sterns of the American Jewish Committee, an expert on anti-Semitic hate crimes. Sterns convinced Charlene

Against all Odds 17 to stay and fight. Charlene shared his advice, If you leave, they win because this is why theyre doing this. They want you to leave because you cant really address these things from the outside (Johns, 2000, p. 127). Tim Giago, founder of Lakota Times, a publication that eventually became Indian Country Today also reached out to Charlene. Charlene stayed and formed the Native American Students for Progress. Giago began writing about Charlenes situation and the UIUC controversy over its mascot. As her challenge progressed, Charlene also received assistance from a local attorney, Brian Savage, who filed Freedom of Information Act requests of the University of Illinois for its internal memos regarding this issue. During this time, Charlene describes a hostile local press aimed at tripping her up in interviews, an openly hateful public at large, and an indifferent administration at the university. Over the years, numerous UI faculty and student organizations became invested in the issue, joining their voices with Charlenes in asking the University of Illinois Board of Trustees to retire its Chief Illiniwek. During this same time, under Charlenes leadership, the Native American Students for Progress grew into a national coalition, aligned with the American Indian Movement, and merged forces with the newly formed National Coalition on Racism in Sports and Media (http://www.aimovement.org/ncrsm/). Charlene Teters completed her MFA at UIUC and returned to New Mexico. UI eventually retired Chief Illiniwek in 2007, but retains its trademark copyright over the logos and continues to use the Fighting Illini name for its sports teams. In the end, the NCAA ruling and the potential loss of revenues from athletic events, and not moral questions or educational concerns, was the deciding factor for the University of Illinois Board of Trustees. Charlene is now a professor at the Institute of American Indian Arts in Santa Fe, and remains involved as an award winning artist, educator, and nationally engaged activist for Native American rights. She was awarded the

Against all Odds 18 Person of the Week Award from ABC World News Tonight in 1997 and her story and the issue of Chief Illiniwek is the subject of a nationally aired award-winning documentary In Whose Honor? by Jay Rosenstein. Over the years, Charlene Teters has been called the Rosa Parks of American Indians in news stories and press releases about her work.

Telling the Story, Narrative Research, and Communities of Practice My thesis in this chapter is that research is a form of storytelling, and that insofar as the writing addresses things that matter in an informative, critical, and insightful manner, narrative research is a particularly rich kind of research. Written in the voices of the researchers and her subjects, narrative research appears as first hand accounts, introspective reflections, and critical analyses of underlying issues raised by such accounts. Filtered through the lens of biography, autobiography and critical theory, certain experiences that stand out as important; and as is the case with the stories told in this chapter, narrative research often reveals and questions power imbalances and social injustices embedded within particular social relationships and institutionalized practices. Some of my favorite research writings that convey both compelling stories and critical understandings include Robert Coles Their Eyes Meeting the World (1995), George Dennisons The Lives of Children (1999), Carole Gilligans In a Different Voice (1982), Madeline Grumets Bitter Milk (1988), Jonathon Kozols Savage Inequalities (1992), Vivian Paleys White Teacher (2000), and Neil Postmans & Charles Weingartners Teaching as a Subversive Activity (1971). Each of these writings embody their authors in-depth and long-term research and analysis of professional and social practices that matter greatly to a great number of people; they privilege the voice and life experiences of the researcher and her/his subjects; and they effectively blend inquiry, systematic data gathering, critical analysis, and persuasive

Against all Odds 19 writing. Most importantly, these writings tell compelling stories about things that draw our attention to the lives of specific people. They are stories are about the lived experiences of our brothers and sisters, families and communities. We are able to personalize these stories and see the world through the eyes of others. And as these stories call into question issues of social injustice, we are compelled to interrogate and reconstruct our own beliefs, values, and practices and to act upon those reconstructions. My own narrative research published as scholarly texts include my previously mentioned essay Racism American Style and Resistance to Change: Art Educations Role in the Indian Mascot Issue (2003), Entrepreneurial Strategies for Advancing Public Engagement as a Form of University-Sanctioned Professional Activity in the New Creative Economy (2011), The Teacher as Public Enemy # 1 (2011), What Contemporary Asian American Artists Teach Us about the Complicated Nature of 21st-Century Americans Multilayered, Transcultural, and Hybridized Identities and Art Practices: Implications for an Intercultural and Social JusticeOriented Approach to Teaching Art (in press), and Acts of Engagement (in press). These writings talk about my experiences, reflections, critical analyses, and understandings about my/our work as art educators wishing to make a difference in the world. My goals in have been to embed my research into stories and to contribute to understandings that foster changes in personal, and professional practices. These are both modest and audacious goals. Its hard to know what real impact any of this has on the lives of children and families. Yet, I continue, now in my 30th year as an art educator, ever hopeful. And I am informed and inspired by countless other art educators who have similarly shared their research.

Against all Odds 20 In closing, I have attempted to demonstrate in this chapter how narrative research has the power to inform and shape both personal and professional actions. I have interwoven stories about Charlene Teters, my own research on the Native American mascot issue, and the work of my colleagues and I in attempting to shape the professional practice of art education through our work with the NAEA. What emerged from my own research is the realization that Native American culture is diverse, complex, and constantly changing; that Indian mascot images and characterizations of Native Americans and their cultural practices are not merely historically and educationally wrong, they are harmful; and that as art educators dedicated to the highest standards of practice it is my/our responsibility to advance historically and culturally accurate, educationally sound, and socially just curricular policies. But what has also emerged from this research is the power of the story, Charlenes story, and how it has informed and shaped the discourse, policies and practices of educational institutions across the country, including as of 2010, the NAEA. I have positioned the National Art Education Association as my/our community of practice. Notably, Charlenes communities of practice include the art world, the Native American community, and the world of higher education. As for the scholars, artists, educators, mothers, administrators, leaders, activists, and anyone else who might happen to read this chapter, our communities of practice overlap in significant ways with Charlenes and it behooves us to hear her story and to be moved to action by it. Were all in this together.

Against all Odds 21 References Barone, T. (2007). A return to the gold standard? Questioning the future of narrative construction as educational research. Qualitative Inquiry, 13(4), 454-470. Bruner, J. (1991). The narrative construction of reality. Critical Inquiry, 18(1), 1-21. Bruner, J. (2004). Life as narrative. Social Research: An International Quarterly, 71(3), 691710. Campbell, J. (1949). The hero with a thousand faces. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Casey, K. (1995-1996). The new narrative research in education. Review of Research in Education, 21, 211-253. Coles, R. (1995). Their eyes meeting the world. New York: Random House. Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. C. (1990). Stories of experience and narrative inquiry. Educational Researcher, 19(5), 2-14. Coulter, C. A., & Smith, M. L. (2009). The construction zone: Literary elements in narrative research. Educational Researcher, 38(8), 577-590. Delacruz, E. M. (2003). Racism American style and resistance to change: Art educations role in the Indian mascot issue. Art Education, 56(3), 13-20. Delacruz, E. M., Ballengee-Morris, C., Blandy, D., Chapman, L., Chung, S. K., Congdon, K., Farris, P., Gude, O., Knight, W., Minner, A., Sanders, J., Stuhr, P., Willis, S., (2010). Background Information Supporting Recommendations for a NAEA Position Statement Regarding the Use of Indian Mascots by non-Native American Schools and Educational Institutions. Retrieved from http://www.arteducators.org/aboutus/Resource_Material_Regarding_the_Use_of_Indian_Mascots.pdf

Against all Odds 22 Delacruz, E. M. (2011). Entrepreneurial strategies for advancing arts-based public engagement as a form of university-sanctioned professional activity in the new creative economy. International Journal of Education and the Arts. Retrieved from http://www.ijea.org/v12i1/ Delacruz, E. M. (2011). The teacher as public enemy # 1: A response. Art Education, 64(6). 510. Delacruz, E. M. (in press). What contemporary Asian American artists teach us about the complicated nature of 21st-century Americans multilayered, transcultural, and hybridized identities and art practices: Implications for an intercultural and social justiceoriented approach to teaching art. In S. K. Chung (Ed.), Teaching Asian art. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Delacruz, E. M. (in press). Acts of engagement. In M. Buffington & S. Wilson (Eds.) Practice Theory: Seeing the power of teacher researchers. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Dennison, G. (1999). The lives of children: The story of the First Street School. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Publisher. Dissanayake, E. (2003). The core of art: Making special. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 1(2), 13-38. Fisher, W. R. (1987). Human communication as narration: Toward a philosophy of reason, value, and action. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Grumet, M. (1988) Bitter milk: Women in teaching. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.

Against all Odds 23 Johns, R. (2000). Interview: Charlene Teters on Native American symbols as mascots. Thought and Action, 10(1), 121-130. Kramp, M. K. (2004). Exploring life and experience through narrative inquiry. In K. B. deMarrais & S. D. Lapan (Eds.), Foundations of research: Methods of inquiry in education and the social sciences (pp. 103-122). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Kozol, J. (1992). Savage inequalities. New York: Crown Publishers. Kozol, J. (2006). The shame of the nation: The restoration of Apartheid schooling in America. New York: Three Rivers Press. Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education. Teachers College Record, 97(l), 47-68. Pewewardy, C. (1998). Why educators can't ignore Indian mascots. Retrieved from http://aistm.org/cornel.why.educators.htm Roberts Rules of Order Revised. (1996). Retrieved from http://www.robertsrules.org/rror-00.htm Paley, V. (2000), White teacher. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Postman, N., & Weingartner, C. (1971). Teaching as a subversive activity. New York: Random House. Quiroz-Martinez, J., Randall, V. R., & Kearney, G. (2001). The persistence of White privilege and institutional racism in US Policy: A report on US government compliance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Oakland, CA: Transnational Racial Justice Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.thepraxisproject.org/tools/White_Privilege.pdf Tasso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community

Against all Odds 24 cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 6991. Teters, C. (n. d.). Website. http://www.charleneteters.com/ Teters, C. (1998). Supplement to the minutes of the March 9, 1998, Senate Meeting, to speak to EQ.97.04, Resolution to Retire Chief Illiniwek. Retrieved from: http://www.senate.illinois.edu/speakers.asp Wenger, E. (2006). Communities of Practice: A brief introduction. Retrieved from http://www.ewenger.com/theory/ Werth, J. (2007). The Chief controversy: A timeline. Champaign-Urbana News Gazette. Sun, 02/18/2007. Retrieved July 12, 2011 from http://www.news-gazette.com/news/universityillinois/2007-02-18/chief-controversy-timeline.html

Against all Odds 25 Appendix A: NAEA Resolution Calling for Discontinuation of All Uses of Race Based Mascots by Educational Institutions (2009)

Whereas we, as members of the world's largest professional art educational organization, strongly support the thoughtful teaching and scholarship of art and other forms of material culture by people with diverse cultural beliefs and practices; and

Whereas we deplore prejudice based on race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, gender, age, disability, size, marital status, or economic status and we reject the use of names, symbols, caricatures, emblems, images, logos, and mascots that promote such prejudice; and

Whereas the United States Commission on Civil Rights issued a Statement on the Use of Native American Images and Nicknames as Sports Symbols that called for an end to this use of American Indian images and team names by non-Indian schools; and

Whereas the Modern Language Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Governor's Association, the NAACP, the National Organization for Women, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, the National Council of Churches, the National Conference of Christians and Jews, Amnesty International, and other highly regarded national, regional, state, and local organizations have called for an end to race-based mascots; and

Against all Odds 26 Whereas, the depiction of Native Americans as Indian mascots and sports team logos is said by Native Americans to be a negative means of appropriating and denigrating Native American cultural identity that involves the inexcusable and immoral display and depiction of ceremonial symbols and practices that have religious and cultural significance to Native Americans; and

Whereas the National Congress of American Indians, the American Indian Movement, the National Indian Education Association, and all 376 recognized Native American Tribes assert that the use of derogatory Native American images such as Indian mascots and caricatures by public and private schools, universities, and sports teams perpetuate a stereotypical image of Native Americans that is likely to have a negative impact on the psychological health, wellbeing, and future success of Native American children;

Be it therefore resolved that we request that the membership and leadership of the NAEA call for the immediate discontinuation of the commercial use of race-based images, nicknames, sports team names, mascots, logos, performance, and persona by non-Native American schools, universities, and sports teams.

Against all Odds 27 Appendix B: Position Statement Regarding the Use of Race Based Mascots in Educational Settings [Adopted April 2010]

NAEA considers Race-based Mascots in educational institutions to be representations that can be seen as derogatory. Visual art educators are encouraged to support their communities in addressing how such images impact all lives. Race-based Mascots offer teachable moments for art classrooms; opportunities to explore the complex and problematic ways that ethnic mascots and similar visual representations convey information about people, communities, cultures, and civilizations. For Example, Visual art educators working in non-Native American schools with Indian mascots are encouraged to ask their school to consult with and be informed by Native American Tribal Councils, and to participate in identifying new positive images worthy of representing their school and communities.

Against all Odds 28

Although the University of Illinois officially retired Chief Illiniwek in 2007, the UI retains the use of the name Fighting Illini along with copyright licensing and selling of products bearing the Chief Illiniwek logos. See the University of Illinois Board of Trustees action to retire Chief Illiniwek at http://www.uillinois.edu/trustees/agenda/March%2013,%202007-Approved%20and%20Reported/001a%20mar%20Consensus%20Resolution.pdf. See the University of Illinois February 2007 news release Chief Illiniwek Will No Longer Perform: NCAA to lift sanctions on Illini athletics at http://www.uillinois.edu/chief/ChiefRelease2-1607.pdf
2

I learned about the construct of White privilege in my research on Indian Mascots in the late 1990s. Work that stood out for me at that time included a report The Persistence of White Privilege and Institutional Racism in US Policy: A Report on US Government Compliance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination compiled by the Transnational Racial Justice Initiative (Quiroz-Martinez, Randall, & Kearney, 2001) and the writings of Native American artists and scholars, including Charlene Teters and Cornel Pewewardy. Writings about White privilege align with Critical Race Theory. Critical Race Theory (CRT) originated in the civil rights movement, law and Critical Legal Studies (CLS), anthropology, history, and ethnic and womens studies, and now also informs journalism (Kozol, 1992, 2006) and educational theory (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995). Centering primarily on issues of racial justice, Critical Race Theory challenges the dominant ideology of White privilege, disputes governmental and social policies and practices emanating from the notion of colorblindness, questions the legitimacy of objective or value-neutral research, recognizes the centrality of experiential knowledge, and commits itself to social justice, seeking reparation and social change. For a good summary of the history of and issues of concern to CRT see Tasso, 2005.
3

White privilege is described as a system that accrues to whites (or European Americans) greater wealth, resources, more access and higher quality access to justice, services, capital -virtually every form of benefits to be reaped from US society -- than other racial groups. . . . White privilege has resulted in impoverishment and injustice for the vast majority of those belonging to racial minorities. . . . It is an overarching, comprehensive framework of policies, practices, institutions and cultural norms that undergird every aspect of US society (QuirozMartinez, et al., 2001, p. 5).
4

Roberts Rules of Order permit an organization to suspend discussion of a previous motion through a subsidiary motion To Lay on the Table the motion under consideration. The motion to lay on the table a previous motion is undebatable, it requires only a majority vote, and it suspends all further deliberation on the original motion being considered. Roberts Rules of Order warns, These are dangerous privileges which are given to no other motion whose adoption would result in final action on a main motion. There is a great temptation to make an improper use of them, and lay questions on the table for the purpose of instantly suppressing them by a majority vote (http://www.robertsrules.org/rror-05.htm#28). In direct conflict with what I believed then and still believe to be one of the most important purposes of the NAEA (that

Against all Odds 29 is, to promote and support excellence in art education practices), and in direct conflict with Roberts Rules of Order, Article V, Section 28, the motion to lay on the table my motion calling for adoption by the Delegates Assembly of the Resolution Calling for the Elimination of RaceBased Mascots in Educational Institutions suppressed all further discussion of the merits of this resolution. I believed that this procedure was used not merely because of time constraints or the need to consider more pressing issues, but because the resolution and its underlying issues were controversial. I was not allowed at the meeting of the Delegates to challenge this lay on the table motion.
5

Listed alphabetically, individuals who contributed to and helped shape the Position Statement and Resource Document in 2010 included Christine Ballengee-Morris, Doug Blandy, Laura Chapman, Sheng Kuan Chung, Kristin Congdon, Vesta Daniel, Elizabeth Delacruz, Phoebe Farris, Olivia Gude, Wanda Knight, Ashley Minner, James H. Sanders, III, Patricia Stuhr, and Steve Willis.
6

I also sought and received support from both the past and the then current Presidents of the NAEA Higher Education Division, Melody Milbrandt and John White. I also asked for advice from Barry Shauck, the then President of the NAEA, who was very encouraging and helpful in pointing me toward the NAEA mission statement, constitution, and strategic plan. These connections to NAEA goals would become the basis of my 6-minute presentation to the NAEA Delegates Assembly in 2010.
7

At the writing of this chapter, I note that Dennis Inhulsen is now the President-Elect of the NAEA.
8

Wanting to move forward from the Position Statement, several colleagues and I who worked on the 2010 Position Statement also presented two sessions entitled "Native Americans as Living Culture" at the 2010 annual conference of the NAEA in Baltimore. Phoebe Farris moderated the sessions, and presenters included Ashley Minner, Christine Ballengee-Morris, Steve Willis, and me. We presented an additional session at the 2011 annual conference, adding Native American educator and scholar Lori Santos to our panel. Plans are in process for another session at the 2012 conference of the NAEA.
9

Chief Illiniweks headdress contained eagle feathers when Charlene Teters first witnessed the Chiefs performance at the University of Illinois. Charlene challenged the universitys possession of these eagle feathers on the basis that the Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty prohibits the possession, use, and sale of eagle feathers by non-Native Americans. In response, the university replaced the Chiefs eagle feathers with turkey feathers.