Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 31–58 | Cite as

Indigenous cultural contexts for STEM experiences: snow snakes’ impact on students and the community

  • Brant G. Miller
  • Gillian Roehrig
Original Paper


Opportunities for American Indian youth to meaningfully engage in school-based science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) experiences have historically been inadequate. As a consequence, American Indian students perform lower on standardized assessments of science education than their peers. In this article we describe the emergence of meaning for students—as well as their community—resulting from Indigenous culturally-based STEM curriculum that used an American Indian tradition as a focal context. Specifically, the game of snow snakes (Gooneginebig in Ojibwe) afforded an opportunity for STEM and culturally-based resources to work in unison. A case study research design was used with the bounded case represented by the community associated with the snow snake project. The research question guiding this study was: What forms of culturally relevant meaning do students and the community form as a result of the snow snake game? Results indicate evidence of increased student and community engagement through culturally-based STEM experiences in the form of active participation and the rejuvenation of a traditional game. Implications are discussed for using culturally-based contexts for STEM learning.


Snow snakes Culturally-based STEM Engagement Community Curriculum 



This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 0737565. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. The snow snake curriculum was the result of a very thoughtful collaboration between the people of the White Earth Nation and the University of Minnesota. More importantly, the snow snake curriculum would not have been possible if it were not for the tribal communities that created this beautiful game and have kept the tradition alive amidst the technological age in which we all live. A special thank you is extended to the knowledge keepers that keep the flame of tradition, language, and sport burning. A special thank you is also extended to Robert Shimek for his willingness to share his knowledge throughout this project.


  1. Aikenhead, G. S. (2001). Students’ ease in crossing cultural borders into school science. Science Education, 85, 180–188. doi: 10.1002/1098-237X(200103)85:2<180:AID-SCE50>3.0.CO;2-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bang, M., & Medin, D. (2010). Cultural processes in science education: Supporting the navigation of multiple epistemologies. Science Education, 94, 1008–1026. doi: 10.1002/sce.20392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barnhardt, R., & Kawagley, A. O. (2005). Indigenous knowledge systems and Alaska Native ways of knowing. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 36, 8–23. doi: 10.1525/aeq.2005.36.1.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barton, A. C., & Tan, E. (2009). Funds of knowledge and discourses and hybrid space. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 50–73. doi: 10.1002/tea.20269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belgarde, M., Mitchell, R., & Arquero, A. (2002). What do we have to do to create culturally responsive programs? The challenge of transforming American Indian teacher education. Action in Teacher Education, 24, 42–54. doi: 10.1080/01626620.2002.10734418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brayboy, B. M. J., & Castagno, A. E. (2008). How might Native science inform “informal science learning”? Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3, 731–750. doi: 10.1007/s11422-008-9125-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brayboy, B., & Castagno, A. E. (2009). Self-determination through self-education: Culturally responsive schooling for Indigenous students in the USA. Teaching Education, 20, 31–53. doi: 10.1080/10476210802681709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Breiner, J. M., Harkness, S. S., Johnson, C. C., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112, 3–11. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00109.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classroom. Journal of Engineering Education, 97, 369–387. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00985.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cajete, G. A. (2005). American Indian epistemologies. New Directions for Student Services, 109, 69–78. doi: 10.1002/ss.155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carlone, H. B., & Johnson, A. (2007). Understanding the science experiences of successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 1187–1218. doi: 10.1002/tea.20237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Castagno, A. E., & Brayboy, B. (2008). Culturally responsive schooling for Indigenous youth: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 78, 941–993. doi: 10.3102/0034654308323036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., & Wylie, C. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of research on student engagement. New York, NY: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7.Google Scholar
  14. Cleary, L. M., & Peacock, T. D. (1998). Collected wisdom: American Indian education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  15. Corson, D. (1999). Community-based education for Indigenous cultures. In S. May (Ed.), Indigenous community-based education (pp. 8–19). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters LTD.Google Scholar
  16. Culin, S. (1975). Games of the North American Indians. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  17. Czerniak, C. M., Weber, W. B., Sandmann, A, Jr, & Ahern, J. (1999). Literature review of science and mathematics integration. School Science and Mathematics, 99, 421–430. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.1999.tb17504.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Deloria, V., Jr. (1992). Relativity, relatedness and reality. Winds of Change (Autumn), 35–40.Google Scholar
  19. Demmert, W., & Towner, J. (2003). A review of the research literature on the influences of culturally based education on the academic performance of Native American students. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Lab.Google Scholar
  20. Doering, A. (2006). Adventure learning: Transformative hybrid online education. Distance Education, 27, 197–215. doi: 10.1080/01587910600789571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59–109. doi: 10.3102/00346543074001059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  23. Gutierrez, K., Rymes, B., & Larson, J. (1995). Script, counterscript, and underlife in the classroom: James Brown versus Brown v. Board of Education. Harvard Educational Review, 65, 445–472. doi: 10.17763/haer.65.3.r16146n25h4mh384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Herrera, F. A., Hurtado, S., Garcia, G. A., & Gasiewski, J. (2012). A model for redefining STEM identity for talented STEM graduate students. In American educational research association annual conference, Vancouver B.C.Google Scholar
  25. Kawagley, A. O. (1995). A Yupiaq worldview: A pathway to ecology and spirit. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
  26. Kawagley, A. O., & Barnhardt, R. (1999). Education Indigenous to place: Western science meets Native reality. In G. A. Smith & D. R. Williams (Eds.), Ecological education in action: On weaving education, culture, and the environment (pp. 117–140). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  27. Lawrence, B. (2003). Gender, race, and the regulation of Native identity in Canada and the United States: An overview. Hypatia, 18, 3–31. doi: 10.1111/j.1527-2001.2003.tb00799.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lee, O., & Luykx, A. (2006). Science education and student diversity: Synthesis and research agenda. New York: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511617508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lemke, J. L. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 296–316. doi: 10.1002/1098-2736(200103)38:3<296:AID-TEA1007>3.0.CO;2-R.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lipka, J., Hogan, M. P., Webster, J. P., Yanez, E., Adams, B., Clark, S., & Lacy, D. (2005). Math in a cultural context: Two case studies of a successful culturally based math project. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 36, 367–385. doi: 10.1525/aeq.2005.36.4.367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lipka, J., Mohatt, G. V., & The Ciulistet Group. (1998). Transforming the culture of schools: Yup’ik Eskimo examples. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. May, S. (Ed.). (1999). Indigenous community-based education. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters LTD.Google Scholar
  33. McKinley, E. (2007). Postcolonialism, Indigenous students, and science education. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 199–226). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.Google Scholar
  34. Meriam, L., Brown, R., Cloud, H., Dale, E., Duke, E., Edwards, H., et al. (1928). The problem of Indian administration: Report of a survey made at the request of the Honorable Hubert Wrok, Secretary of the Interior, and submitted to him, February 21 st , 1928. Baltimore: The Brookings Institute.Google Scholar
  35. Miller, B. G., Doering, A., Roehrig, G., & Shimek, R. (2012). Fostering Indigenous STEM education: Mobilizing the adventure learning framework through snow snakes. Journal of American Indian Education, 51, 66–84.Google Scholar
  36. Moje, E. B., Collazo, T., Carrillo, R., & Marx, R. W. (2001). “Maestro, what is ‘quality’?”: Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 469–498. doi: 10.1002/tea.1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (2005). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  38. Moran, R., Rampey, B. D., Dion, G. S., & Donahue, P. L. (2008). National Indian education study 2007 part I: Performance of American Indian and Alaska Native students at grades 4 and 8 on NAEP 2007 reading and mathematics assessments. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. (NCES 2008457)Google Scholar
  39. National Museum of the American Indian (NMAI) Resource Center (Producer). (2007). Snowsnake: Game of the Haudenosaunee [DVD].
  40. National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  41. Newmann, F., Wehlage, G. G., & Lamborn, S. D. (1992). The significance and sources of student engagement. In F. Newmann (Ed.), Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools (pp. 11–39). New York: Teachers college Press.Google Scholar
  42. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  43. Powers, K. M. (2006). An exploratory study of cultural identity and culture-based educational programs for urban American Indian students. Urban Education, 41, 20–49. doi: 10.1177/0042085905282249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Puvirajah, A., Verma, G., & Webb, H. (2012). Examining the mediation of power in a collaborative community: Engaging in informal science as authentic practice. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7, 375–408. doi: 10.1007/s11422-012-9394-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rahm, J. (2002). Emergent learning opportunities in an inner-city youth gardening program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 164–184. doi: 10.1002/tea.10015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: Evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 3–19). New York, NY: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Roth, W. M., & Lee, S. (2002). Scientific literacy as collective praxis. Public Understanding of Science, 11, 33–56. doi: 10.1088/0963-6625/11/1/302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher, 68, 20–26.Google Scholar
  49. Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effect of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 571–581. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Smith, G. H. (1992). Research issues related to Maori education. The Issue of Research and Maori, 1–9.Google Scholar
  51. Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. London: Zed Books. doi: 10.1038/70963.Google Scholar
  52. Snively, G., & Corsiglia, J. (2001). Discovering indigenous science: Implications for science education. Science Education, 85, 6–34. doi: 10.1002/1098-237X(200101)85:1<6:AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-R.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Verma, G., Puvirajah, A., & Webb, H. (2015). Enacting acts of authentication in a robotics competition: An interpretivist study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52, 268–295. doi: 10.1002/tea.21195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511803932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. White Earth Reservation Curriculum Committee. (1989). White earth: A history. Cass Lake, MN: The Minnesota Chippewa Tribe.Google Scholar
  56. Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oak, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  57. Yore, L. D. (2008). Science literacy for all students: Language, culture, and knowledge about nature and naturally occurring events. L1 – Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 8, 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Curriculum and InstructionUniversity of IdahoMoscowUSA
  2. 2.University of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA

Personalised recommendations