# data[].attributes.body
Career assessment tool to help individuals decide if they are on the correct path.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Native American, American Indian Center of Arkansas Career Self Assessments

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
American Indian Center of Arkansas works to provide employment and support services for the Native population of Arkansas.

# data[].attributes.body
Survey on books non-Native counselors can reference to help learn cultural views of Native Americans.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Resources for Counseling Native Americans

# data[].attributes.body
Attached is my paper outlining my findings based on my research.

# data[].attributes.body
"Examples of cultural values which may lead to misunderstanding and misinterpretation of behavior"  (Hendrix, L. R. (n.d.). Health and health care of American Indian and Alaska native elders. Retrieved October 26, 2017, from https://web.stanford.edu/group/ethnoger/americanindian.html)

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses Native American employment rates compared to their white counterparts as well as introduces policies to increase the Native American employment rate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In recent years, Native Americans have increased their income and wealth through new and innovative economic development activities. For instance, tribes have increased their control over their natural resources and food systems, they have become players in the country's energy sector, and they have begun trading with Asia (National Congress of American Indians 2013b). Despite these positive developments, however, Native Americans are still one of the United States' most economically disadvantaged populations.

In 2011, about one in four American Indians and Alaska Natives 1 (26.4 percent) lived in poverty. In contrast, about one in 10 non-Hispanic whites (11 percent) lived in poverty (U.S. Census Bureau 2013). Not surprisingly, the Native American population is a relatively low-wealth population. In 2000, Native Americans' median wealth was equal to only 8.7 percent of the median wealth among all Americans (Chang 2010, 14). For most Americans, a home is a key source of wealth. Native Americans, however, have a significantly lower homeownership rate than whites, and the homes they do own tend to be worth much less than those of whites (Insight Center for Community Economic Development 2009, 1).

As has long been the case, many Native American communities are economically depressed, and their jobless rates are high. Only when Native Americans have a high and steady employment rate will their poverty rate decline and their wealth begin to grow.

This briefing paper examines the problem of the low rate of American Indian employment and outlines strategies to address it. Part I examines American Indian employment rates, the Native American-white employment rate gap nationally and by state, and possible causes of this gap. There is also some exploratory analysis of employment rates by tribe. Part II consists of policy recommendations for increasing American Indian employment.

Part I finds:

Over 2009-2011, the American Indian employment rate among 25- to 54-year-olds (i.e., the share of that population with a job) was 64.7 percent-13.4 percentage points lower than the white rate.

Of the 34 states examined for Native American employment over 2009-2011, the highest American Indian employment rates were in Nebraska (73.4 percent), Connecticut (72.0 percent), and Texas (71.3 percent).

In all of the 34 states examined, there was a large, very large, or extremely large Native American-white employment rate disparity in 2009-2011. The largest disparities were in the Midwest among the states with some of the highest white employment rates.

Even when Native Americans are similar to whites in terms of factors such as age, sex, education level, marital status, and state of residence, their odds of being employed are 31 percent lower than those of whites.

High educational attainment is the factor most likely to increase American Indians' odds of securing employment.

Part II presents a variety of proposals to improve Native American employment outcomes. It argues:

All levels of government should support strong Native American self-determination and leadership.

The number of Native American community development financial institutions should be increased, and existing ones should be strengthened.

Researchers need to conduct investigations of the states and tribes with the best Native American employment situations to see what lessons can be learned.

Researchers need to conduct investigations of the states with the worst Native American employment situations to see what can be improved.

The following policies will likely increase the Native American employment rate through improved educational outcomes:

Improving Native American maternal and child health

Providing high-quality early childhood education for Native American children

Maximizing the number of regular high school diplomas obtained by Native Americans

Increasing the number and size of tribal programs supporting higher education

Researchers should investigate the role of racial discrimination in Native American employment outcomes.

To better understand tribal labor market conditions, researchers will need better labor market data than are available in the American Community Survey.

Part I: An examination of the Native American employment rate

The following sections explain that despite making some strides in recovering from a long history of subjugation, American Indians still suffer economically. In particular, they have employment rates far below those of whites, both in the country overall and at the state level. Additionally, Native Americans have lower odds of employment than whites even after accounting for various demographic factors.

The "painful legacy of discrimination"

Native America continues to struggle to recover from a long history of subjugation. As President Obama recently remarked, "The painful legacy of discrimination means that . . . Native Americans are far more likely to suffer from a lack of opportunity-higher unemployment, [and] higher poverty rates" (White House Office of the Press Secretary 2013). The good news is that Native Americans are recovering politically, economically, and culturally. The bad news is that there is still a long way to go.

The land that is the United States, of course, once all belonged to indigenous peoples. This land, and its resources and assets, were taken by European immigrants through conquest, expropriation, theft, and broken treaties. In addition to this tremendous loss of wealth, Native Americans also lost political autonomy. Political and economic subjugation would, in and of itself, produce tremendous cultural damage, but Native Americans were also repeatedly subject to forced cultural assimilation.

However, as the former president of the National Congress of American Indians, Jefferson Keel (2013), recently observed, Native America is now in an era of recovery. "My tribe, the Chickasaw Nation," he reported, "contributes $2.5 billion to our regional economy every year and employs over 12,000 people." He also noted that the Moapa Band of Paiute Indian Nation is building the largest solar power plant on tribal lands; the plant is contracted to provide power to over 100,000 Los Angeles homes. Furthermore, the Tlingit and Haida tribes are among the top employers in southeast Alaska. As a result of developments like these, "more highly-skilled and educated Native young people are coming back to serve in our communities as doctors, lawyers, teachers, engineers, entrepreneurs" (Keel 2013).

While there is much evidence of Native Americans using initiative, creativity, and their cultural traditions to improve their economic conditions, there is still much work to be done. Tribes need the federal government to fully honor its promised obligations (see National Congress of American Indians 2013a). Native Americans also need the federal government to focus on the country's economic future by addressing the jobs deficit and by making investments in health, education, and infrastructure. Without these investments, the challenges for American Indians will be significantly greater.

Why focus on the employment rate

One major factor behind the high poverty rates and low wealth of American Indians is their low rate of employment. The Native American unemployment rate is considerably higher than the white rate (Austin 2013). Without work, it is difficult for an individual to rise out of poverty; without a well-paying job, it is difficult to save, purchase a home, and build wealth. Thus, increasing Native American employment is necessary for addressing Native American poverty, and is a foundational step toward building Native American wealth.

While the unemployment rate is the most commonly used measure of joblessness, it is not the best measure for populations suffering from chronically high unemployment. In these communities a significant segment of the population stops looking for work because their odds of finding work are very low. Once someone stops looking for work, she is no longer counted as unemployed; she is defined as not being in the labor force. Technically, to be "unemployed," one has to be actively looking for work.

The employment rate, or the employment-to-population ratio, is a better measure for populations suffering from chronically high unemployment. This measure simply provides the share of the population that is working. Whether or not individuals are actively looking for work does not affect the measure.

Native American and white employment rates

The analysis below compares the employment rates (i.e., the employment-to-population ratios) of whites and American Indians in their prime working ages (between 25 and 54 years old), when their employment rates should be highest. It uses data from the 2009-2011 American Community Survey (ACS). This survey provides a large enough sample of American Indians for detailed analyses. 2

Table 1 presents the employment and unemployment rates of 25- to 54-year-old American Indians and whites nationally. For the 2009 to 2011 period, the American Indian employment rate was 64.7 percent, 13.4 percentage points lower than the white rate. This is a very large disparity. For all 25- to 54-year-olds, the Great Recession resulted in a 3.1 percentage-point decline in the employment rate from 2007 to 2010. 3 The 2009-2011 American Indian-white employment rate gap is more than four times the size of the decline seen nationally over the Great Recession. Thus, the data suggest that, relative to whites, Native Americans typically live under economic conditions comparable to a recession with impacts four times as harmful as the Great Recession's overall effects.

Table 1 also shows the American Indian-white unemployment rate gap. The American Indian unemployment rate averaged 14.6 percent over 2009-2011, 6.9 percentage points higher than the white rate of 7.7 percent. Not only is the size of the disparity larger using the employment rate (13.4 percentage points versus 6.9 percentage points), but the denominator is also larger. The employment rate's denominator is the entire working-age population, whereas the unemployment rate's denominator is the labor force (only the people who are employed or actively looking for work). Any other jobless individuals are not in the labor force.

Figure A illustrates the value of focusing on the employment rate over the unemployment rate. To reduce the Native American unemployment rate among the 25- to 54-year-old population to the white rate would require about 91,000 jobs. To increase the Native American employment rate to the white rate would require more than twice as many jobs-about 234,000. This larger number is a better measure of the economic hardship among American Indians.

A large share of the Native American population identifies as multiracial. One may be interested to know whether this difference in identification matters for individuals' ability to find employment. Table 2 shows that among the prime-working-age population, there does appear to be a difference between the population that identifies as American Indian alone and the population that identifies as American Indian or Alaska Native in combination with some other racial group(s). The "American Indian alone" population has an employment rate 3.2 percentage points lower than the "in-combination" population. While this is a statistically significant and substantive difference, it is dwarfed by the Native American-white difference for either group. The "alone" versus "in-combination" difference is appropriate for further study, but it will not be examined further in this report. The analyses in this report will combine the data from the "alone" and the "in-combination" American Indian and Alaska Native populations.

Men and women can experience very different labor markets. Women are still the primary caregivers for children and the elderly; they thus may have lower rates of participation in the paid labor force. Table 3 shows that while both 25- to 54-year-old American Indian men and women are less likely to be employed than their white peers, the Native American-white gap for males is larger than the gap for females. Also, while men generally have a higher employment rate than women, the gender gap among American Indians is smaller than the gap among whites. An exploration of gender differences is worthy of further study, but it will not receive a detailed examination in this report.

It is reasonable to wonder to what extent Native Americans' employment problems are due to their residence on reservations and tribal lands. Table 4 presents the employment rates of prime-working-age American Indians living on or close to reservations and of those not living on or close to reservations. While the employment rate of American Indians on reservations is lower than that of those off reservations, both rates are low and only 2.5 percentage points apart. In short, the problem of low Native American employment is not limited to the on-reservation population.

State employment rates

The American Community Survey has a sufficient sample size to permit an examination of Native American employment rates by state. We will focus on the 33 states that contain Native American reservations and tribal lands, plus Illinois (because many Native Americans were relocated to Chicago during the Urban Indian Relocation Program of the mid-20th century). 4 Therefore, we will highlight data from 34 states.

Table 5 displays employment rates for these 34 states among prime-working-age (i.e., 25- to 54-year-old) American Indians and whites. It shows that the highest American Indian employment rates were spread across the country. Nebraska (73.4 percent), Connecticut (72.0 percent), and Texas (71.3 percent) were the top three states of the 34 examined for Native American employment in 2009-2011. The lowest Native American employment rates were in South Dakota (54.8 percent), Arizona (56.6 percent), and Utah (57.3 percent).

While the states with the highest Native American employment rates were dispersed across the country, the highest white employment rates were concentrated in the Midwest. North Dakota (88.9 percent), South Dakota (87.5 percent), and Nebraska (85.6 percent) had the highest white employment rates. The lowest rates were in Alabama (73.9 percent), Mississippi (74.9 percent), and Oregon (75.0 percent). The lowest white employment rate (Alabama's 73.9 percent) was slightly higher than Native America's highest rate (Nebraska's 73.4 percent).

In every state there was a large, very large, or extremely large Native American-white employment rate disparity among the 25- to 54-year-old population, as depicted in Figure B. In Mississippi the American Indian employment rate was 5.1 percentage points lower than the white rate. This was the smallest disparity. In Oklahoma and Texas the disparity was 7.3 and 7.5 percentage points, respectively.

The largest disparities were in the Midwest among the states with some of the highest white employment rates. South Dakota had the second-highest white employment rate, but it had the lowest Native American employment rate, yielding an employment rate disparity of 32.7 percentage points. North Dakota had the highest white employment rate, and this rate was 24.4 percentage points above the Native American rate. Minnesota had the fourth-highest white rate, and this rate was 23.9 percentage points above the Native American rate. Further examination is necessary to understand why states with such high white employment rates can have such low Native American rates.

Exploring predictors of Native American employment

The disparities within states mean that the low Native American employment rates are not simply the result of Native Americans being concentrated in states with weak job creation. There must be other factors besides state of residence that explain the low Native American employment rates.

Table 6 displays demographic characteristics of the 25- to 54-year-old American Indian and white populations. It shows that a smaller share of American Indians than whites have bachelor's or advanced degrees. While 22.4 percent of whites have a bachelor's degree, the rate for Native Americans is 12.0 percent. As compared with whites, a greater share of American Indians have GEDs or have not completed high school. Of American Indians, 13.5 percent are high school dropouts, compared with 7.1 percent of whites. Generally, the better educated a population, the higher its employment rate. This lower educational attainment of American Indians may help explain their lower employment rate.

In the mainstream U.S. economy, facility with spoken English is a plus. As compared with whites, a smaller share of American Indians speak only English at home. This raises the possibility that there may be more American Indians than whites who are relatively disadvantaged because of a lower level of facility with English. If true, this may contribute to the lower American Indian employment rate.

Also, a greater share of Native Americans than whites has a disability. Individuals with disabilities are less likely to be employed. This factor may help explain Native Americans' lower employment rate. Additionally, a greater share of Native Americans lives on or near reservations. Because reservations tend to have worse economies than off-reservation spaces, this factor too may contribute to the low American Indian employment rate.

We now turn to a multivariate analysis that examines how the odds of being employed are affected by the state of residence, the factors just discussed (i.e., educational attainment, facility with English, disability, and living on or near a reservation), as well as other factors listed in Table 6 (i.e., age, sex, Hispanic ethnicity, veteran status, number of children, marital status, and urbanicity). This analysis will allow us to assess whether all of these factors simultaneously might explain Native Americans' lower probability of being employed.

All of the factors included in the analysis together do not explain why American Indians are less likely to be employed than whites. Controlling for all the factors, prime-working-age Native Americans still have 31 percent lower odds of being employed than similar whites (see Appendix Table A for the full logistic regression results). In other words, even when Native Americans are the same age and sex, have the same education level and marital status, reside in a city in the same state, and are similar to whites on all of the other variables in the analysis, Native Americans still have 31 percent lower odds of being employed than whites.

There is much that we do not fully understand about American Indians' low employment rates. But the preceding analysis demonstrates that a number of factors that come to mind do not fully explain the phenomenon; it is not just a result of low education levels or residing on a reservation. The analysis leaves open the possibility that racial discrimination may play a role.

By conducting a second analysis and examining how the factors interact with American Indian status (see Appendix Table B for the full results), we can gain a deeper insight into which ones might most promote or hinder Native American employment. Table 7 shows how various demographic factors affect prime-working-age Native Americans' odds of being employed. For example, the first row shows that Latino status increases the odds of employment by 28 percent. This means that after taking into account all of the other factors in the table, an American Indian who also identifies as Latino has greater odds of being employed than an otherwise similar American Indian who does not identify as Latino. 5

Education and English

The factor that does the most to increase American Indians' odds of employment is higher education. As shown in Table 7, American Indians with advanced degrees have seven times the odds of American Indians with less than a high school education. The odds decline for each step down in educational attainment, but even American Indian GED holders have about 50 percent greater odds of being employed than otherwise similar American Indians with less education. American Indians who speak only English at home have 15 percent higher odds of being employed than those who do not.

States and reservations

Table 7 also shows the change in American Indians' odds of being employed in a particular state relative to otherwise similar American Indians in states without tribal lands. After taking all other factors in the analysis into consideration, Native Americans residing in Nebraska, Mississippi, and Wyoming receive the biggest increases in their odds of being employed relative to Native Americans in states without tribal lands, with increases of 64 percent, 50 percent, and 33 percent, respectively.

The states that lower Native Americans' odds of employment the most are Utah, Arizona, South Dakota, and California. In Utah, American Indians' employment odds are 32 percent lower than those of otherwise similar Native Americans in states without tribal lands, compared with reductions of 29 percent in Arizona and 24 percent in both South Dakota and California.

As Table 6 illustrates, a majority of Native Americans do not live on or near a reservation. Thus, for most Native Americans, the lack of job opportunities on a reservation cannot explain their relatively low odds of finding employment. However, as one might expect, living on or near a reservation reduces Native Americans' odds of finding employment (by 7 percent). When one considers all the other factors in the analysis, reservation status is important, but is one of the less influential factors explaining the Native American employment rate.

Differences between Native Americans and whites within the same state

The state portion of Table 7 shows how the odds of employment among Native Americans in a particular state compare with those of otherwise similar Native Americans in states without tribal lands. Native Americans can do better or worse relative to states without tribal lands because a particular state has a strong or weak economy. Native Americans can also do better or worse because within a particular state there are some unmeasured qualities or circumstances that make them do better or worse than whites in that particular state.

Table 8 allows us to compare prime-working-age American Indians and whites within the same state after controlling for the other factors. We begin with the same Native American state data from Table 7. We then add the comparable data for whites. For example, for both American Indians and whites, residing in Alabama reduces one's odds of employment by 10 percent (relative to living in a state without tribal lands). In comparison, residing in Arizona reduces American Indians' odds of employment by 29 percent, compared with a 12 percent reduction for whites. Thus, there is something about being an American Indian in Arizona that makes it worse in terms of employment odds than being white in Arizona.

We can compare the conditions for American Indians and whites in a state more easily by subtracting the white column from the American Indian column. All states where there is no statistically significant difference between the state's effect on the employment odds of American Indians and of whites now have a value of zero. States where American Indians perform better than whites (when all else is equal) have positive values. States where American Indians perform worse than whites (when all else is equal) have negative values.

American Indians do surprisingly well relative to whites in three states: Mississippi, Oregon, and Oklahoma. In Mississippi, American Indians have 50 percent higher odds of being employed, while whites have 6 percent lower odds. In Oregon, American Indians only have 2 percent higher odds of being employed, but whites have 19 percent lower odds. In Oklahoma, American Indians have 25 percent higher odds of being employed, while whites only have 7 percent higher odds. There is something positive occurring for Native Americans in these three states. These states may hold lessons about what can be done to improve Native American employment outcomes more generally.

There are eight states where American Indians perform worse relative to whites in the state. These states are, in declining order of the size of the disparity, South Dakota, North Dakota, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Montana, Utah, and Arizona. In South Dakota, American Indians experience a 24 percent reduction in the odds of employment, while whites experience a 102 percent increase. The situation in North Dakota is very similar; American Indians' odds are reduced 13 percent, while whites' odds are increased 90 percent. In Iowa, American Indians have no increase or decrease in odds, but whites have a 59 percent increase.

While these states have large disparities, they may also present an opportunity to increase the American Indian employment rate. If American Indians had employment odds equal to those of whites in these states, overall American Indian employment would be boosted substantially.

Exploring tribal employment

The tribal employment data presented in this section of the paper must be used with caution because of several issues that potentially compromise its accuracy. The samples by tribe are quite small; therefore, sampling limitations and problems in the American Community Survey, the data source upon which these analyses are based, can be magnified. Because of this issue, employment rate estimates may be off significantly (see Schmitt and Baker 2006; DeWeaver 2010; National Congress of American Indians Policy Research Center 2013). Additionally, the coding of the data on tribal enrollment appears to have inaccuracies. 6 Thus, the data presented here are, at best, only very rough exploratory data; however, they are, to the author's knowledge, the only readily accessible recent (post-2005) estimates of tribal labor force conditions.

Table 9 shows the employment rate estimates for prime-working-age individuals living on or near a reservation by reported tribal enrollment. As explained in endnote 6, the data are limited to individuals in one state except for the Yuman and the Navajo. The states are listed in parentheses.

At 75.8 percent, the Tlingit-Haida tribe has the highest employment rate. This rate is relatively close to the white national average rate of 78.1 percent. The Cherokee (72.9 percent), Choctaw (72.3 percent), and Cheyenne (71.5 percent) all have employment rates exceeding 70 percent. These rates are considerably higher than the overall reservation employment rate of 63.4 percent (see Table 4) or the 60.3 percent average rate for the tribal subsample discussed in this section.

The three tribes with the lowest employment rates are all in Arizona: the Pima (42.5 percent), the Tohono O'Odham (42.6 percent), and the Apache (48.4 percent). These rates are much lower than the average for the subsample. They also indicate that less than half of the prime-age population in these tribes is working.

A tribe can have a high or low employment rate due to something unmeasured about the tribe or because of some other factor correlated with membership in the tribe. For example, the average age of a particular tribe may be higher than that of other tribes. Older individuals are more likely to be employed, and that fact may lift the tribe's employment rate. Also, the educational distribution of tribes may differ. Tribes with higher levels of education would be expected to have higher employment rates. The multivariate analysis allows us to take age, education, and other factors into account to see if there is any additional effect due to tribal membership.

Table 10 presents the percent increase or decrease in the odds of employment for each tribe, relative to Navajo membership. The Navajo were chosen as the reference group simply because they are the largest. Tribes for which there is no statistically significant change in odds are shown as having a 0 percent change. After controlling for other factors, members of the Tlingit-Haida tribe continue to have the highest odds of employment. The effect is 86 percent greater than membership in the Navajo tribe. Membership in the Aleut, Cherokee, and Choctaw tribes also has strong positive effects on the odds of employment relative to the Navajo tribe. These tribes potentially have lessons that could be shared to help improve the employment rates of American Indians generally.

Part II: Policies to increase the Native American employment rate

It is clear that Native Americans suffer from a deep employment crisis. Nationally, their employment rate is extremely low. While there are many Native American communities by state or by tribe that are faring even worse than average, many are also doing better than average. In this part of the paper, we make recommendations based on what lessons can be learned from the prior data analysis and from some of the research on economic development for Native Americans and other groups.

Support strong Native American self-determination and leadership

American Indians and Alaska Natives have access to substantial natural resources. Reservations contain millions of acres of commercial timber, important plant and animal life, and vast mineral resources (National Congress of American Indians 2013b). A number of current policies, however, prevent tribes from being able to develop these natural resources as would a state or local government (National Congress of American Indians 2013b). The federal trust management system needs to be reformed to allow tribes greater ability to use their natural resources for economic development (National Native American Economic Policy Summit 2007, 7-8).

More generally, researchers Stephen Cornell and Joseph P. Kalt (2000) found that strong and culturally appropriate tribal leadership is associated with higher employment rates. In their analysis, tribes governed by a chief executive or a legislature, typically a parliamentary tribal council, had better employment outcomes than tribes governed by a general council. The researchers also found that for the tribal government to be effective, it needed to be based on the cultural traditions of the tribe and not simply on forms that were at one time imposed by the federal government.

Increase the number of, and strengthen, Native American community development financial institutions

Many reservations lack access to capital, credit, and financial services (U.S. Department of the Treasury 2001), which stifles entrepreneurship and other economic development activities that lead to job creation. Native American community development financial institutions (CDFI) are an important solution to this problem. The Four Bands Community Fund, a Native American CDFI in Eagle Butte, S.D., illustrates some of the potential of these institutions. Four Bands has "served nearly 4,000 clients and disbursed approximately 580 microloans, small business loans, and credit-builder loans totaling $4.1 million" (Fiddler 2013). It has also "contributed to the establishment or expansion of more than 100 Native-owned businesses and the creation or retention of more than 400 jobs on the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation" (Fiddler 2013). More and stronger Native American CDFIs would facilitate Native American economic self-determination through wealth-building and entrepreneurship.

Investigate the states and tribes in the best employment situations

The analysis in Part I shows that there are some states and tribes where Native Americans are receiving significant boosts to their odds of employment. After one takes into account demographic, personal, human capital, urbanicity, and reservation-status factors, residence in Mississippi, Oregon, and Oklahoma appears to improve Native Americans' odds of employment relative to those of whites.

What is occurring in these states, and can it be replicated? Is it due to state policies, tribal policies, fortuitous economic circumstances, or something else? As is often the case with research, the findings of this study lead to new, important questions.

Among tribes, the limited data available suggest that the Tlingit-Haida, Aleut, Cherokee, Choctaw, Pueblo, Lumbee, Creek, Chippewa, and Eskimo tribes had relatively high odds of being employed. As with the states where Native Americans are doing relatively well, these tribes need to be investigated further to understand why they are faring better than most other tribes. Their successes may be transferable to American Indians more broadly.

Investigate the states with the worst employment situations

Native Americans' difficulties in the labor market are not due just to differences in educational attainment, English ability, basic demographic factors, personal characteristics, urbanicity, and reservation status. Even after taking these factors into account, Native Americans still did particularly poorly in some states relative to whites.

These states may also present an opportunity to improve Native American employment outcomes. There may be situations where there are job opportunities in a state, but for some perhaps easily addressed reason, Native Americans are blocked from those opportunities. South Dakota, North Dakota, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Montana, Utah, and Arizona are all such states. If we can better understand what the cause is, we may be able to address it and equalize Native American and white employment outcomes.

Improve Native American education outcomes

Of all the variables in the analysis in Part I, the educational attainment variables produced the largest positive effect on the odds of employment. Policies that can increase Native American educational attainment appear to have strong potential for improving the employment rates of American Indians.

There are many policies that may be effective at accomplishing this. Educational attainment is a product of not just a child and the child's school, but also the family and community resources available to the child. Children from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds tend to do worse in school than middle-class children precisely because they come from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds (Lee and Burkam 2002). It is necessary to improve family and community resources to enable children to do their best in school. What follows are several ways to achieve this:

Improve maternal and child health: There are lessons for Native Americans from research on African Americans. While black students perform worse than white students on standardized tests, black test scores have improved over time, and the black-white test score gap narrowed considerably over the 1980s. Recent research suggests that this narrowing was due to improved neonatal health outcomes for black children following the desegregation of hospitals in the 1960s. The researchers conclude that "investments in health through increased access at very early ages have large, long-term effects on [educational] achievement" (Chay, Guryan, and Mazumder 2009).

A larger proportion of Native Americans than whites are uninsured, and they fare poorly on health access measures. Native Americans who have health coverage through the federally funded Indian Health Service have low rates of contact with health professionals (James, Schwartz, and Berndt 2009). The post-neonatal mortality rate of Native Americans is about twice that of whites (National Center for Health Statistics 2013). Improvement of the maternal and child health of Native Americans is likely to improve the educational performance of Native American children.

Provide high-quality early childhood education: Research has shown that high-quality early childhood education can have long-term positive impacts on educational attainment. The best programs increase the likelihood of high school and college completion (Barnett and Belfield 2006). American Indian three- and four-year-olds have one of the lowest rates of preschool enrollment. Over 2009-2011, 58 percent of American Indian children were not enrolled in preschool, compared with 50 percent of non-Hispanic white children (Kids Count Data Center 2012). For the American Indians who are enrolled in preschool, one has to wonder about the relative quality of their preschools compared with those of whites. The data suggest that whites have access to better quality early childhood education than nonwhites (Lee and Burkam 2002). To improve Native American children's educational outcomes, they would need not simply higher preschool enrollment, but enrollment in high-quality preschools. A high-quality preschool for Native Americans would also have to be respectful of Native American culture and history.

Maximize the number of regular high school diplomas: One-fifth (20.1 percent) of prime-age Native Americans do not have a regular high school diploma, compared with about one-tenth (11.3 percent) of whites (Table 6). Native Americans who obtain regular high school diplomas have higher odds of finding employment than those who drop out of high school and those who obtain GEDs. The National Dropout Prevention Center/Network (n.d.) has identified 14 dropout prevention strategies in addition to early childhood education that Native American organizations and advocates can explore to address this problem. Preventing students from dropping out of high school may be the employment policy with the lowest upfront costs since some of the programs involve reforming and adding to already existing educational institutions.

Increase the number and size of tribal programs supporting higher education: The National Congress of American Indians Policy Research Center (2012) has assembled examples of tribal programs to support the higher education and training of tribal members. These programs help tribes develop the human capital necessary for their economic development. They also potentially provide role models and mentors to encourage others to pursue higher education.

For example, as the NCAI Policy Research Center reports, the Old Harbor Tribal Council's Undergraduate Specialized Academic Award requires students receiving the scholarship to work with youth in the tribe so they can "help to expand youths' visions of what is possible and inspire them to likewise pursue higher education." The more highly educated adults there are in a community, the more children will aspire to be highly educated when they become adults.

Investigate the role of racial discrimination

The fact that Native Americans have lower odds of being employed even after controlling for age, education, state of residence, reservation residence, urbanicity, marital status, disability status, and other factors leaves open the possibility that Native Americans may face racial discrimination in the labor market. Paired-tester or audit studies, in which researchers pair white and nonwhite "testers" to present equivalent applications to the same employers, show that black and Latino job candidates are less likely than equally qualified whites to receive positive responses from employers (Pager, Western, and Bonikowski 2009). As such, it would not be surprising for Native American job applicants to also face discrimination in the labor market.

There should be research employing the paired-tester methodology to investigate whether this is indeed the case. It would be useful to conduct this research in the states where Native Americans have the lowest odds of employment relative to whites: South Dakota, North Dakota, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Montana, Utah, and Arizona.

Improve the tribal labor market data

Understanding and improving the economic conditions of Native Americans requires good data. Unfortunately, there are questions about the accuracy of American Community Survey (ACS) data nationally. Research commissioned by the National Congress of American Indians has found that the ACS counts differ from the Census (DeWeaver 2010; National Congress of American Indians Policy Research Center 2013). The tribal-level data in the ACS appear to have coding inaccuracies, and do not have sufficient detail to study labor market conditions on many reservations in a timely fashion.

There should be additional research to assess the accuracy of the ACS data for studying Native Americans. It seems that it will be necessary for surveys to be designed specifically to collect tribal-level data.

Conclusion

Native Americans face clear economic challenges. Their employment rates are far below those of whites, both in the country overall and at the state level-and Native Americans have lower odds of employment than whites even after accounting for various demographic factors. At the same time, however, the path forward is also clear. Through empowering Native American communities, providing them with the necessary financial resources, improving Native American education outcomes, and conducting additional research on Native Americans' economic circumstances, we can begin to surmount these challenges. In short, the challenge is great-but so is the promise. We can point to a growing number of tribes where not only are the majority of members working, but where the tribe also contributes positively to the local economy.

About the author

Algernon Austin directs the Economic Policy Institute's Program on Race, Ethnicity and the Economy (PREE). PREE works to advance policies that enable people of color to participate fully in the American economy and benefit equitably from gains in prosperity. As director of PREE, Austin oversees reports and policy analyses on the economic condition of America's people of color. Prior to joining the Economic Policy Institute, Austin was a senior fellow at Dēmos and assistant director of research at the Foundation Center. He received his Ph.D. in sociology from Northwestern University.

Endnotes

1. In this paper "American Indian," "Native American," and "Native" will be used interchangeably to refer to American Indians and Alaska Natives, including the Hispanic and multiracial American Indian and Alaska Native populations.

2. While the ACS has a relatively large sample of American Indians, there is reason to believe that the survey still underrepresents the most disadvantaged Native Americans (DeWeaver 2010; National Congress of American Indians Policy Research Center 2013). The more disadvantaged a population, the harder the population is to cover in surveys (Schmitt and Baker 2006). It is also important to note that differences in sampling and methodology cause the labor force statistics in the ACS to differ from the Current Population Survey, the source of the statistics produced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. For these same reasons, ACS statistics will differ from Bureau of Indian Affairs data.

3. Author's analysis of American Community Survey data from Ruggles et al. (2013).

4. Illinois is included on the recommendation of the National Congress of American Indians.

5. Categories where the change in likelihood is not statistically significant are indicated as having a 0 percent change.

6. For example, individuals who live on a reservation and report a "Cheyenne" tribal membership are concentrated in three different states: Montana, Oklahoma, and South Dakota. It seems that these individuals are members of at least three different tribes: the Northern Cheyenne of Montana, the Cheyenne-Arapaho of Oklahoma, and the Cheyenne River Sioux of South Dakota.

In the tribal employment analyses, the possible coding problem is partially addressed by limiting tribal designations to the state with the greatest number of individuals. For example, the "Cheyenne" designation is limited to individuals on reservations in Montana. The other individuals are dropped from the analysis. In the cases where a reservation is known to span two or more adjacent states, residents from adjacent states are all included as members of the tribe. This only applies to the Yuman, who are assumed to be the Quechan Indians of the Fort Yuma-Quechan Reservation, whose reservation spans California and Arizona (Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. n.d.), and the Navajo Nation, which spans New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah.

Even if one limits a tribal designation to one state, this does not mean that the data refer to one tribe. For example, within Arizona there are at least four Apache reservations: the San Carlos Apache Tribe, the Tonto Apache Tribe, the White Mountain Apache Tribe, and the Yavapai-Apache Tribe. The Apache data in the analysis in this section, which are restricted to residents of Arizona, then likely pool data from all four of these tribes.

These data problems highlight the need for labor force statistics generated at the tribal level, such as those published by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) American Indian Population and Labor Force Report. Unfortunately, this BIA report has not been updated since 2005.

References

Austin, Algernon. 2013. "Native Americans Are Still Waiting for an Economic Recovery." Economic Policy Institute Economic Snapshot, October 29. http://www.epi.org/publication/native-americans-are-still-waiting-for-an-economic-recovery/

Barnett, W. Steven, and Clive R. Belfield. 2006. "Early Childhood Development and Social Mobility." The Future of Children, vol. 16, no. 2, 73-98.

Chang, Mariko. 2010. Lifting as We Climb: Women of Color, Wealth, and America's Future. Insight Center for Community Economic Development. http://www.insightcced.org/uploads/CRWG/LiftingAsWeClimb-WomenWealth-Report-InsightCenter-Spring2010.pdf.

Chay, Kenneth Y., Jonathan Guryan, and Bhaskar Mazumder. 2009. Birth Cohort and the Black-White Achievement Gap: The Roles of Access and Health Soon After Birth. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 15078.

Cornell, Stephen, and Joseph P. Kalt. 2000. "Where's the Glue: Institutional and Cultural Foundations of American Indian Economic Development." Journal of Socio-Economics, vol. 29, 443-470.

DeWeaver, Norm. 2010. The American Community Survey: Serious Implications for Indian Country (unpublished white paper). National Congress of American Indians Policy Research Center.

Fiddler, Tanya. 2013. "Working Together: Effective Partnerships Between Native CDFIs and Banks Bridge the Financing Gap in Indian Country." Community Developments Investments. U.S. Department of the Treasury.

Insight Center for Community Economic Development. 2009. The Racial Gap in Homeownership and Home Lending. http://www.insightcced.org/uploads/CRWG/Racial%20Gap%20in%20Homeownership%20Spring%202009.pdf.

Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. n.d. "Quechan Tribe: Introductory Information." http://itcaonline.com/?page_id=1173.

James, Cara, Karyn Schwartz, and Julia Berndt. 2009. A Profile of American Indians and Alaska Natives and Their Health Coverage. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. http://kaiserfamilyfoundation.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/7977.pdf.

Kids Count Data Center. 2012. "Children Ages 3 to 4 Who Are Not Attending Preschool by Race" (data table). Annie E. Casey Foundation. http://goo.gl/shrB3l.

Lee, Valerie E., and David T. Burkam. 2002. Inequality at the Starting Gate: Social Background Differences in Achievement as Children Begin School. Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute.

National Center for Health Statistics. 2013. "Table 11. Infant, Neonatal, and Postneonatal Mortality Rates, by Detailed Race and Hispanic Origin of Mother: United States, Selected Years 1983-2008." Health, United States, 2012: With Special Feature on Emergency Care. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

National Congress of American Indians. 2013a. "Honoring the Trust Responsibility in the Federal Budget." Tribal Leaders Briefing Book, November 2013. http://files.ncai.org/broadcasts/2013/November/ba%20-%20Budget.pdf.

National Congress of American Indians. 2013b. Securing Our Futures. http://www.ncai.org/Securing_Our_Futures_Final.pdf.

National Congress of American Indians Policy Research Center. 2012. "Higher Education and Workforce Development: Leveraging Tribal Investments to Advance Community Goals." Tribal Insights Brief. http://www.ncai.org/resources/ncai_publications/tribal-insights-brief-higher-education-workforce-development-leveraging-tribal-investments-to-advance-community-goals.

National Congress of American Indians Policy Research Center. 2013. American Community Survey Data on the American Indian/Alaska Native Population: A Look Behind the Numbers (unpublished white paper).

National Dropout Prevention Center/Network. n.d. Effective Strategies for Dropout Prevention. http://www.dropoutprevention.org/effective-strategies.

National Native American Economic Policy Summit. 2007. National Native American Economic Policy: Developing Tribal Economies to Create Healthy, Sustainable, and Culturally Vibrant Communities. http://www.ncai.org/resources/ncai-publications/native-american-economic-policy-report.pdf.

Pager, Devah, Bruce Western, and Bart Bonikowski. 2009. "Discrimination in a Low-Wage Labor market: A Field Experiment." American Sociological Review, vol. 74, 777-799.

Ruggles, Steven J., Trent Alexander, Katie Genadek, Ronald Goeken, Matthew B. Schroeder, and Matthew Sobek. 2013. Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 5.0 [machine-readable database]. University of Minnesota.

Schmitt, John, and Dean Baker. 2006. Missing Inaction: Evidence of Undercounting of Non-Workers in the Current Population Survey. Center for Economic and Policy Research.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2013. "Selected Population Profile in the United States, 2011 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0201." American Fact Finder. http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml.

U.S. Department of the Treasury. 2001. The Report of the Native American Lending Study: Community Development Financial Institutions Fund.

White House Office of the Press Secretary. 2013. "Remarks by the President on Economic Mobility." December 4. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/12/04/remarks-president-economic-mobility.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Native Americans and Jobs: The Challenge and the Promise

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In recent years, Native Americans have increased their income and wealth through new and innovative economic development activities. For instance, tribes have increased their control over their natural resources and food systems, they have become players in the country's energy sector, and they have begun trading with Asia (National Congress of American Indians 2013b).

# data[].attributes.body
This video goes with the above article by the Economic Policy Institute.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
native americans in the united states (ethnicity)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
indigenous peoples of the americas (ethnicity)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Native Americans and Jobs: The Challenge and The Promise

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From the Economic Policy Institute in Washington, DC. www.epi.org

# data[].attributes.body
Norm DeWeaver, Former National Representative for the Indian and Native American Employment and Training Coalition, discusses the importance of innovation in tribal workforce development.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Norm DeWeaver: Tribal Innovation: The Key to Workforce Development Success

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Norm DeWeaver, Former National Representative for the Indian and Native American Employment and Training Coalition, provides his learned perspective on how and why the ability of tribes to innovate holds the key to workforce development success for Indian Country.

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses best practices to assist Native Americans on their career path and points to Holistic and Narrative models as best choices for this population.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
09/01/2016

Understanding the Career Development Journey for Native American Clients

By Jenna Crabb and Lamarita Vicenti

Little research has been done on how to effectively assist Native American clients on their career development path. What we do know is often limited to what we learn in our multicultural counseling classes or if we are lucky through our experiences working with this population.

According to the Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics Report (2015), "American Indian and Alaska Natives made up 1 percent of the labor force." For our state, "New Mexico has 219,512 Indian citizens, which represent nearly 10.5% of the state's entire population" (New Mexico Indian Affairs Department, 2016). It is important to understand the native population and what is needed for their career success.

It is important to establish a supportive, positive, and trustful relationship. Native clients are drawn to openness, approachability, dependability, understanding and humor. Native clients will appreciate your encouragement and your ability to make them aware of their strengths through empowering them through their career journey and decision making. Positive re-enforcement, empathy, focusing on their strengths, and self-efficacy/confidence help build and support the Native client; they will be more likely to grow and be enthusiastic about their future goals and career fields.

Family dynamics are important topics to discuss because Native clients typically want to stay close to their communities. They usually have a close family and community connection which is significant to them. While exploring career fields, client's beliefs, values, and spirituality should be a part of the discussion so they know what to expect in the field of study and/or their chosen career.

Coaching and guiding the client on how to approach the job search or interview with cultural norms that the recruiters/employers may not understand (i.e., hair, dress, and traditions) is crucial to the client continuing on in their career field. Most Native clients have a goal to return to their home community after they complete their degree; therefore, understanding the job market and the community needs can help with the client's career field decision.

There are two career models that stand out when assisting Native clients: Holistic and Narrative Career Construction. For many Native American nations, one must always address the person holistically. Therefore, subscribing to a more eclectic perspective when working with this population will enable the career counselor to meet their needs.

Sunny Hansen's Integrative Life Planning model (ILP) "addresses diversity issues related to ethnicity, race, gender, socioeconomic status and spirituality...[by] integrating the mind, body and spirit" (p. 109, Niles and Harris-Bowlsbey, 2013).

Career construction theory involves the power of storytelling. Storytelling is a tradition that is vital to many cultures, especially the Native American life. "People use stories to organize their lives, construct their identities, and make sense of their problems" (p. 9, Savikas, 2015). "As clients give voice to their stories, they hear what they already know and find the answers which they seek. From their own knowing emerges a new perspective that enables clients to envision a revised identity story" (p. 9, Savikas, 2015).

A male Native American client came in to my office upset as he needed to change his major. Once we sat down to discuss what was going on - he informed me that he was needing to consider other majors as he was not going to be able to complete a required class due to his cultural beliefs and values. Once we started processing what this meant, he informed me that as a pre-medical student, he needed to take a class where the students would be working with cadavers. It was against the beliefs and values of his culture to work with cadavers. He was very upset about this and spoke with the professor as well as the academic advisor about this required class. They all informed him that there was no waiver or substitution for this class. His ultimate career goal was to become a doctor and take his knowledge back to his community. There had to be a way to make this work. The client and I came up with a plan to propose to his program advisor, his professor and the elders of his tribe. He would conduct his class expectations (specifically for this required class) Monday through Friday here on campus, but on the weekends he would return to his tribe and meet with the medicine men to "cleanse his spirit" from Friday night through Sunday then return to classes Monday morning. His home was within a few hour's drive to and from campus. He would do this throughout the semester. He was dedicated to make this a success. All those involved agreed to this proposal; his professor even allowed him extra time to complete assignments due to not being able to complete homework over the weekend and his medicine men dedicated their time to him on weekends. He was able to continue with his career goals.

This was a prime example of pulling together as an academic group as well as a community group to help this client meet the obligations and expectations from both his academics and his culture for his career path.

New Mexico Indian Affairs Department, 2016 website: Retrieved from http://www.iad.state.nm.us/history.html

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, , November 2015, Report 1057. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/race-and-ethnicity/archive/labor-force-characteristics-by-race-and-ethnicity-2014.pdf

Jenna Crabb, PhD, LPC, NCC, GCDF is the Director for Career Services and adjunct faculty for Counselor Education at the University of New Mexico. University of New Mexico has 7% Native American students on its campus (2015-2016). Jenna has worked in higher education for over 20 years and specifically in Career Services for the past 14 years. She has served on various community organizational boards around employment, career development and counseling. She can be reached at

is the Guidance Counselor at Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute (SIPI) Bureau of Indian Education, a National Indian Community College and Land Grant Institution serving American Indian and Alaskan Native students (100% Native American students). Lamarita is a member of the Jicarilla Apache Nation. Lamarita has worked in the career counseling field for 10 years. Lamarita has worked at the Pueblo of Sandia Education Department as a Liaison/Scholarship Coordinator for three years. She can be reached at

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Understanding the Career Development Journey for Native American Clients

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
09/01/2016 Little research has been done on how to effectively assist Native American clients on their career development path. What we do know is often limited to what we learn in our multicultural counseling classes or if we are lucky through our experiences working with this population.

# data[].attributes.body
This graph compares the percentage of individuals with at least a high school education within the various reservations

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants and Native Americans in the labor force without at least an undergraduate degree.

# data[].attributes.body
This graph compares the rates of unemployment between white and Native American populations.

# data[].attributes.body
Study done on the transition period between high school and the career decision making process of Native Americans youth.

# data[].attributes.body
This article looks at modern and postmodern perspectives on Native Americans’ career development and their implications for career counseling with Native Americans.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The need for effective career counseling and related research among Native Americans is striking. Census data show that Native Americans have the highest unemployment rates of any minority group with the exception of African American males. Unemployment approaches 50%, and the number of children living below the poverty level exceeds 50% on many reservations. Likewise, American Indians have the lowest rates of persistence in postsecondary education. Despite evidence of academic ability, postsecondary dropout rates are higher for American Indians than for any other minority. American Indians are also under-represented in graduate programs. Other researchers have found that American Indian students have a lower rate of academic achievement than students in other minority groups. Despite these obvious challenges, relatively little research has focused on Native Americans' career development.

Scholarly writing on career-related issues among Native Americans can be roughly divided into two historic foci. Early research focused primarily on understanding Native Americans' career development vis-a-vis existing theories and used instruments that assumed universal constructs. These efforts could be labeled modern perspectives on Native Americans' career development. More recently, career research and practice have used more contextual and culture-driven perspectives. These efforts can be grouped as postmodern perspectives on Native Americans' career development. Both of these paradigms have generated findings that have important implications for career counseling with Native Americans.

Modern Perspectives on Native Americans' Career Development

Early researchers (pre-1990) focused on similarities and differences between the mainstream population's and Native Americans' career development. Some researchers worked to demonstrate the universality of career development constructs by showing similarity between assessment results from mainstream populations and Native American populations. A common assumption in these studies was that the construct being researched (e.g., occupational values, career maturity) and the assessment used to assess the construct (e.g., Kuder, E., Self-Directed Search, Career Maturity Inventory) were valid and appropriate for the Native American participants. Such assumptions were characteristic of the positivistic perspective taken by many researchers and practitioners over much of the last century. Interestingly, the discussion of these studies often included questions about the viability of the constructs and instruments of the dominant culture.

Some researchers took traditional career assessment instruments and proposed the possibility that diverging worldviews of minority groups, including Native Americans, could challenge the validity of their use. Such questions gave rise to the postmodern perspectives that became more common in both research and practice around the turn of the century.

Dennis West conducted a study that related the career maturity of Native American college students to their academic performance. West also compared these correlations to those of non-Native American students on the same variables. The study found that Native American students scored lower on assessments of career maturity and that career maturity ratings were related to academic performance for all students. However, West was confused by the fact that Native American students' career maturity ratings did not seem to increase with age and academic standing as they did with non-Native Americans. He concluded that constructs such as career maturity, at least as they were defined by current research and assessment instruments, may not be appropriate for Native American populations.

Postmodern Perspectives on Native Americans' Career Development

The past 2 decades have seen a marked shift in assumptions about career development among many researchers and practitioners. Frustrated with the positivistic and universalistic assumptions of the modernist paradigm, many have turned to more postmodern perspectives. These alternative perspectives have focused more on the culture, context, and constructions relevant to Native Americans' career development. Rather than take constructs from the existing understanding of career development in the dominant culture and apply them to Native American cultures, these postmodern efforts have worked to understand Native Americans' career experiences from a culturally situated perspective.

Cindy Juntunen and colleagues conducted a study of American Indian women's perspectives of their career journeys. Responding to questions about the relevance of career constructs based in the dominant culture, this qualitative study explored the idea of career from the perspective of the participants. The study found that participants had culturally situated definitions of career and that various supportive factors and obstacles impact Native Americans' ability to live in two worlds-the dominant White culture and Native American culture. Biculturality was seen as an inevitable part of a career development, as most workplaces are based in European American values and culture. The use of a qualitative method that reflected the researchers' postmodern leanings led to culturally relevant, context-bound findings. This research also led to recommendations for models and programs of career development that are similarly culturally relevant.

Rod M. McCormick and Norman E. Amundson made a progressive attempt to develop a culturally relevant model of career development for First Nations People (aboriginal peoples in Canada). Their model reflects a postmodern perspective in its attempt to account for cultural values common among First Nations People as well as career development factors common across many cultures.

The growing body of postmodern perspectives on Native Americans' career development includes some culture-specific implications for career counseling and career education. These implications, in addition to some of the implications of modernist perspectives, are outlined below.

Implications

Although many have questioned the validity of mainstream career assessments for Native Americans, evidence suggests that traditional ways of conceptualizing and measuring interests (e.g., Holland's RIASEC- Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional-model) are viable with Native American groups. This research suggests that while Native American groups may have idiosyncratic response patterns related to cultural identity, rural locations, or tribal affiliation-the general construct of interests with varying degrees of interrelatedness among them, seems to have utility with Native Americans. This, in turn, suggests that counselors might use Holland code-based assessments with some degree of confidence in both their validity and utility.

Another general implication, supported by both modern and postmodern research, is the importance of considering social connections in career counseling. Native Americans often include tribe, community, or family in the process of career decision making and career development. This collectivist perspective may also color one's values. For example, a Native American client from a reservation may put a high value on homeland-both the importance of living in a certain physical place and the importance of contributing to one's home community through one's work. Some suggest that career counselors include parents, family members, or tribal leaders in the career counseling process.

Like many people of color, Native Americans often experience the challenge of becoming bicultural as part of their career development. This challenge involves maintaining a commitment and investment in one's traditional culture and at the same time becoming fluent in the dominant culture in order to enhance one's career development. Regardless of one's linguistic background, the process of becoming bicultural can be likened to the cognitive and emotional difficulty involved in learning a new language.

An Important Caveat

While it is important for counselors to consider how cultural factors might affect Native Americans' career development, it is also important to avoid thinking of Native Americans as a homogenous group. There are more than 500 different tribes in the United States, with more than 250 languages. Canada has 50 First Nations along with other aboriginal groups. Obviously, there is considerable diversity within the broader Native American culture. Career counselors, while considering general aspects of Native American culture, should also attend to specific cultural identity factors such as tribe, community, and language.

Despite these inherent challenges, the recent pluralization of research methods and the breadth of implications they can provide seem to provide a foundation for increasingly more productive research and effective career intervention with Native Americans.

References:

1. Herring, R. D. (1990). Attacking career myths among American Indian college students. School Counselor, 38, 13-18.

2. Hoffman, L. L, Jackson, A. P., & Smith, S. A. (2005). Career barriers among Native American students living on reservations. Journal of Career Development, 32(1), 31-15.

3. Jackson, A. P., Smith, S. A., & Hill, C. L. (2003). Academic persistence among Native American college students. Journal of College Student Development, 44(4), 548-565.

4. Juntunen, C. L., Barraclough, D. J., Broneck, C. L., Seibel, G. A., Winrow, S. A., & Morin, P. M. (2001). American Indian perspectives on the career journey. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48(3), 274-285.

5. Martin, W. E., Jr. (1991). Career development and American Indians living on reservations: Cross-cultural factors to consider. Career Development Quarterly, 39, 273-283.

6. McCormick, R. M., & Amundson, N. E. (1997). A career-life planning model for First Nations People. Journal of Employment Counseling, 34(4), 171-179.

7. Turner, S. L., Trotter, M. J., Lapan, R. T., Czajka, K. A., Yang, P., & Brissett, A. E. (2006). Vocational skills and outcomes among Native American adolescents: A test of the integrative contextual model of career development. Career Development Quarterly, 54, 216-226.

8. West, D. K. (1988). Comparisons of career maturity and its relationship with academic performance. Journal of American Indian Education, 27(3), 1-7.

See also:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The need for effective career counseling and related research among Native Americans is striking. Census data show that Native Americans have the highest unemployment rates of any minority group with the exception of African American males. Unemployment approaches 50%, and the number of children living below the poverty level exceeds 50% on many reservations.