They envisioned a situation where they would sit at desks in straight lines and be “talked at” by an instructor.
That image was disintegrated when they first
came to a class. They had signed up for a class
because they wanted to learn how to do art: weaving, basket making, pottery, sewing, cooking, etc. When they came into class there were no desks, and few other students, and the instructors (mentors) got them “doing” things in the first class. The focus of the class was on learning, not on teaching. The monitors and evaluators had been instructed to focus on what the students were doing instead of what the teacher was doing. The evaluation of the teacher had to be “Did the students learn?”, and that was evident from the product being produced.
One parent credits Hopitutuqaiki with engaging her child in classwork and studying enough that he was able to graduate high school. That student took a belt weaving class and became interested in the process. He was successful in producing a Hopi belt, which gave him much satisfaction and price. He then took a kilt-weaving class and had similar success. Then it was on to other weaving classes. He took all the Hopi weaving classes that Hopitutuqaiki offered over a period of two years. He gained enough self-confidence from his weaving success that he was able to complete his academic classes at the Hopi High School and graduate.
We are working with the strengths of the students, each one individually, and requiring that they learn how to produce an art object. Their resources are the teacher (mentor), their parents, other relatives, and others in the class. So far, in over 20 years, there have been only two students who did not respond to this
method. Only two students did not even try to
complete their projects. This approach has encouraged many students to take class after class. Some students have become mentors themselves and are now working with a class of students themselves. The school did surveys of students a year or more after they took a class. Over one-third were still using what they learned in the class to produce art/craft objects.
As the art program of the school became more accepted and more popular, the Board Spent a lot of time discussing Hopi values and the needs of the Hopi people. It was obvious that the art classes were going well and that some of the endangered Hopi crafts were being renewed for another generation. The next area they chose to address was the decreasing use of the Hopi language. They wanted to be a part of the Hopi language solution rather than causing further deterioration. They decided to start a Hopi language immersion art-based preschool.
A preschool is expensive! The Board had been able to provide art classes for most of the year, but those classes were for periods of one day to four weeks. A preschool would be year-round with all the expenses for personnel, equipment, food, and space. For several years the school sponsored a four-week Hopi language immersion art-based preschool for three- and
four-year-olds. The program worked well for
Currently, we de-emphasize what students can already do and “beat them up” with the things they can’t do. Perhaps we need to focus on the positive—what students can do and expand from there to other areas.
17