Institutional Mission Analysis

When it comes to oppression, it is not always easy to recognize who is the offender and how does the oppressor indicate their questionable agenda. In fact, more than often the oppressor’s ways of communication is subtle and yet very much precise in delivering pieces of information from his or her point of view. In this case of studies we’ve been covering for the Institutional Mission Analysis, we have been given materials, sources, and contexts that could help us go over the conditions and messages perpetuated in Indian boarding schools, like The Carlisle School in Pennsylvania. 

First and foremost, a definition of what an institutional mission is must be given. An institutional mission is an official statement that proves and affirms the goals and the ethics that such institute claims to achieve in their work. Usually institutional missions are more present in and proper of private institutes, where a specific portion of society finds its safe space in a very limited environment. It is in fact difficult to maintain and write out an institutional mission when the school represent different and a multitude of cultural heritages in one place. However, an institutional mission is important in any institute because it gives the chance to build a communicative bridge between the faculty and the school’s body itself, made up by students, staff, and other entitities who help inside the structure. 

An example of emblematic institutional mission written in the American History is the one explaining the role of Indian boarding schools, in Richard Henry Pratt’s speech “Kill The Indian, Save the Man” (1892). In this piece, Pratt embodies the typical narrow-minded Caucasian man of its times, secure in his comfort zone of privileges. His words carry a series of oxymorons and oppressive statements, that do not depict the situation of minorities in its transparency and authenticity. His mission, written as an official document, fails in being transparent, but wins in being captivating for its designated audience.

He starts with affirming that his views are the result of a social construct, an idea that comes from a higher position in the hierarchy he’s part of. His statements starts with these words: “A great general has said that the only good Indian is a dead one, and that high sanction of his destruction has been an enormous factor in promoting Indian massacres. In a sense, I agree with the sentiment, but only in this: that all the Indian there is in the race should be dead. Kill the Indian in him, and save the man.” This is already an explicit extract where oppressors and oppressed are clearly stated in their status and ethnicity. 

During his speech, Pratt follows a fabricated and repressive rhetoric, which confirms his point of view. “Indian schools are just as well calculated to keep the Indians intact as Indians as Catholic schools are to keep the Catholics intact. Under our principles we have established the public school system, where people of all races may become unified in every way, and loyal to the government; but we do not gather the people of one nation into schools by themselves, and the people of another nation into schools by themselves, but we invite the youth of all peoples into all schools. We shall not succeed in Americanizing the Indian unless we take him in in exactly the same way.” It is clearly not an invitation the one made by Pratt’s fellows and collegues. Their behaviour doesn’t welcome nor listen to others’ communities necessities.

To confirm this, Zitkala-sa’s writing is a tangible proof of how in reality the lack of comprehension and integration was installed inside the school system, especially in the institutes focused on educating diverse groups like African Americans and in this case Indigenous American people. Zitkala-sa recalls her mother’s words in describing what the white population had done in her community: “There is what the paleface has done! Since then your father too has been buried in a hill nearer the rising sun. We were once very happy. But the paleface has stolen our lands and driven us hither. Having defrauded us of our land, the paleface forced us away.” (part 1, “My mother”, from American Indian Stories by Zitkala-sa). These words, coming from an authentic place and accredited state of mind, prove that rather than invitation, what Pratt thinks he’s doing looks more like a programmed agenda against the annihiliation of a culture and heritage, considered wild and savage.

“If the principle we have always had at Carlisle—of sending them out into families and into the public schools—were left out, the result would be the same, even though such schools were established, as Carlisle is, in the centre of an intelligent and industrious population, and though such schools were, as Carlisle always has been, filled with students from many tribes. Purely Indian schools say to the Indians: “You are Indians, and must remain Indians. You are not of the nation, and cannot become of the nation. We do not want you to become of the nation.” This is a biased approach to the Native American culture, whose education differes in terms of values and intimacy from the one settled and organized by colonizers like Pratt. 

Native American Zitkala-sa (1876-1938) was a Yankton Dakota Sioux woman who dedicated her life to education and social activism between and among her original community of Native American heritage and the new settlers, made of Caucasian men and women. Her ability to use the immigrants’ language (English) pushed her statements ahead and due to this choice she was able to spread the news and make her voice heard. One remarkable episode that she recalls in her writings, a sold example of testimony from her point of view, is the one when her hair is cut. “Our mothers had taught us that only unskilled warriors who were captured had their hair shingled by the enemy. Among our people, short hair was worn by mourners, and shingled hair by cowards!” (part 2, “The cutting of my long hair”, under “The School Days of an Indian Girl” section). As a Yankton Dakota Sioux young girl, this act has been traumatic and the inability of the new settlers to not understand what this act meant, is offensive and a typical example of oprressor’s attitude towards humanity and intellectual property.

Nowadays, being able to write an institutional mission is essential, nomatter what kind on institution or organization is. Living in a cosmopolitan world like the Western society claims to be, should push us members of the academia and students’ body to understand our mission in learning the many issues we’re presented in front of us. We must be intentional in our readings and analysis: only in this way we are able to become better citizens and conscious individuals in every environment we’re surrounded by.

Mary Anne Pember is remarkable in her experience as a Native American jounalist in contemporary America. “Like most Native American peoples, our family’s story is touched by the legacy of boarding schools, institutions created to destroy and vilify Native culture, language, family, and spirituality.” (from “Death by Civilization” in The Atlantic, wrote in March 2019). From the same article, Ms. Pember continues reporting her story. “When my mother was alive, I would often interrogate her about her life at the Sister School. Annoyed, she would demand, “Why do you always have to go poking?” And so I’ve spent much of my personal life and professional work as a journalist trying to uncover and investigate all that happened to her and thousands of others at Indian boarding schools.”

The similarities between her and Zitkala-sa’s writing are eye-opening because despite the time differences, the content is displayed with the same tone and urgency to be heard and seen. “As of now, apologies in the United States have been few and far between. Although President Barack Obama signed the Native American Apology Resolution on December 19, 2009, apologizing for past “ill-conceived policies toward the Native peoples of this land,” the resolution had no impact on federal policy toward Native Americans.” It is time in fact to act and take positions in reporting solid coverage in the school system and how minorities and different communities in the country are rightfully taken into consideration. Native American journalism and writing was subversive and helped a great deal to illustrate clarity and transparency in the ways and methods education was being held in the school system.

In 2019, journalist Destiny Alvarez wrote an article on how to navigate and how to use descriptive language at its best. The piece is published and can be found on the International Journalists’ Network. Alvarez’s piece is fundamental in media, because it gives a vast spectrum of tools with which journalists, communicators like public speakers, and educators should appraoch and navigate diversity within their words. Language plays a great role and close attention must be paid in these issues.  “Journalists should actively name tribal nations instead of using blanket terms like “Native American.” Every nation is different, and journalists need to actively appreciate the differences between Indigenous communities.” They must be curious and compassionate in learning an individual’s background, which differs from community to persons. 

“As journalists, it’s important to recognize that Indigenous communities are not just groups of people to be reported on like they’re exhibits. While including these communities in coverage, it’s important to recognize that they are part of the audience, and journalists’ reporting should appeal to them as well.” I couldn’t agree more with such paragraph. Coming from a journalistic background, I value literacy and social justice very much, because they are at the core of ethical transparency and accuracy. Analyzing institutional missions, no matter what the context or topic is related to, it is fundamental to begin the discussion with a variety of sources, with the goal to break down stigmas and implicit messages around messages that should be safe, straightforward, and educational models.