In 2005, the Navajo Sovereignty in Education Act was signed into law by the Navajo Nation. Like the No Child Left Behind Act, this Navajo Nation legislation was as much a policy statement as it was a law. It marked the first time that the Navajo Nation linked sovereignty with education by expressing its intent to control all education within its exterior boundaries. The objective of the law was to create a department of education that would resemble the states of Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah in which the Navajo Nation resides. Through their department of education, the Navajo Nation would operate the educational functions for its populace. This study looked at the implications and impact that perspectives of this law would have on public schools within Arizona from the perspective of five superintendents in Arizona public schools within the Navajo Nation were gained through open-ended interviews. It examined the legal, fiscal, and curricular issues through the prism of sovereignty. Through the process of interviews utilizing a set of guided questions in a semi-structured format, five superintendents in Arizona public schools within the Navajo Nation shared their perspectives. Analysis of the five interviews revealed curriculum, funding, jurisdictional, and fear or mistrust as problems the Navajo Nation will need to overcome if it is to begin full control of all aspects of education within its boundaries. There is a strong need for the Department of Dine' Education to educate public schools with regards to the Navajo Nation Sovereignty in Education Act of 2005. Administrators need more training in tribal governments. Like the constitution, the Navajo Sovereignty in Education Act will be interpreted differently by different people. But, without action, it will be ignored. Within the Act's pages are the hopes of the Navajo Nation and the dreams for our young Navajo students.

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 has had significant ramifications across public education. Due to reporting mandates, schools and districts are being held publicly accountable for the academic performance and progress of all students. Since implementation of the law, much attention has been focused on the "achievement gap," that is, any differences in performance between groups of students. Students associated with the achievement gap typically come from certain demographics: minorities, low-income families, students with disabilities, and students with limited English proficiency (English Language Learners). The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of using curriculum-based measures (CBMs) on math achievement, particularly ELL students. Eight elementary schools in northwestern New Mexico, divided into two groups (control and experimental) of four schools each, used the same state-approved, core math curriculum, were compared using a quasi-experimental research design. In addition to the regular core curricular materials, the experimental schools were provided with weekly CBMs, containing sample questions developed from the state's performance standards. Each weekly CBM included at least one question from each of the five broad math strands: number and operations, algebra, geometry, measurement, and data and probability. Fourth (N = 283) and fifth grade (N = 294) students who had continuous enrollment for the duration of the experiment served as subjects. Successive regular administrations of the New Mexico Standards Based Assessment math subtest served as the pre- and posttest measures. Analysis of covariance tests, with the pretest as the covariate, revealed no significant treatment effects for either the fourth or fifth grade students through the use of CBMs as a supplement to the core math curriculum. The significant effects, supported by previous research, were the school and, especially, the teacher for both grades. In this study, the effects of the classroom teacher were of more importance to student achievement than either the school a child attended or what curriculum program or process a given school employed.

Although racial minorities are heavily represented in student bodies throughout the United States, school administrators who work with minority children have been overwhelmingly White. Previous research by race scholars has demonstrated that systems of racial dominance in the larger society are often replicated in schools. However, the role of White school administrators in perpetuating or disrupting racism has not been documented. This study examined the racial attitudes and resulting professional practices of White school administrators who worked in a unique environment. These administrators lived and practiced their profession in towns that lay just outside the borders of the Navajo Nation, a large Indian reservation in the Four Corners region of Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. Termed border towns, these communities were populated by a large majority of Native Americans, with a heavy representation of Hispanics. This placed White school administrators in the uncommon position of living and working in a place where they were a numeric minority, while simultaneously representing the majority culture in the United States. Twelve White border town administrators in four different communities agreed to participate in the interview study, conducted over a two-month period in 2010 and 2011. Using a semi-structured interview format, the researcher gathered data on participants' racial attitudes and analyzed responses to find common themes. Common responses among the interviewees indicated that there were clear racial hierarchies within border town schools and that these hierarchies were sometimes atypical of those found in mainstream American society. These racial hierarchies were characterized by a dichotomy of Native American students based on residence in town or on the reservation, as well as deferential treatment of White administrators by Native American constituents. The intersectionality of race and socioeconomic class was a key finding of the study, with implications for school administrators' professional actions. Racial attitudes also impacted White border town administrators' actions and sometimes reinforced institutionally racist practices. Finally, results of the study supported several established models of race relations and White identity formation.