By Dominic Weilminster
Herald Staff Writer
December 6, 2004
With two hands clasped to describe the interconnectedness of all aspects of
human life, Clyde Benally explained how he would heal his son.
"His mind, heart, body and spirit - these things are one - and when one is
disturbed, they all are," said Benally, a Navajo Indian addressing the Fort
Lewis College Board of Trustees on Wednesday, Dec. 1.
Benally's son Craig is not sick - at least not in a Western sense, but the
four parts of his being, his father said, have been disrupted after having
statements from a final exam at Fort Lewis College published without his
knowledge.
The younger Benally is the only student mentioned in an article written by
Fort Lewis Center of Southwest Studies Director Andrew Gulliford to come out
against its publication.
But he is not alone in his disapproval.
In recent weeks, Gulliford's article has created upheaval among American
Indian students at the college who feel they were misrepresented and had
intellectual property rights and sacred traditions violated. On Wednesday,
students, faculty members and people from the community joined Craig
Benally's father and spoke about the issue in front of the Fort Lewis Board
of Trustees.
The article, "The Kokopelli Conundrum," published in American Studies
International, is a personal essay by Gulliford about teaching American
Indian students.
Though only his first name was mentioned, Craig Benally still feels that the
publication was a violation of his privacy.
Clyde Benally told trustees that he planned to prepare a healing ceremony
for his son "not because he did something, but because Dr. Gulliford did
something."
The ceremony, to be held in southern Utah, is a Navajo tribal ritual to
reunite the body, heart, mind and spirit.
But others beyond Benally's son may need similar healing.
Patrick Kincaid, a senior at Fort Lewis and a Southern Cheyenne Indian,
joined the elder Benally in his address to the Board of Trustees and spoke
on behalf of the Student Alliance for Appropriate Representation, formed in
response to the incident.
Kincaid explained that the trust between students and faculty has been
breached after seeing the Gulliford article expose seemingly confidential
classroom information without any permission from students.
Echoing Kincaid's concern from the faculty's point of view was Rick
Wheelock, an associate professor in the Center of Southwest Studies.
"The courses I teach negotiate intercultural subjects and challenges, and
this concerns me," said Wheelock.
Much of the debate has centered on whether there are any legal grounds to
hold Gulliford accountable for his actions. As of yet, no violations have
been found.
Two bodies of law have so far been considered. Gulliford's article was not
found to be applicable to laws regarding publicized research, and a clear
violation of laws protecting student records has yet to be determined.
The college's Institutional Review Board is mandated by federal law to make
sure no one is subject to research against their will.
Under the review board's definition of research, Gulliford's article was
deemed to fall outside the board's purview because it does not seek to prove
a hypothesis, said philosophy professor Sarah Roberts-Cady, who leads the
review board.
Gulliford's article, however, may be governed by the Family and Educational
Rights and Privacy Act. The act is primarily concerned with the protection
of student academic records, including anything from grades to assignments,
according to explanations of the law posted on the Fort Lewis College and
other university Web sites.
But some say arguing that Gulliford could not have published the information
about American Indian traditions ignores the scores of other research about
American Indian practices that has been published in the past.
"A lot of the 'sensitive' things Gulliford said have been published before,"
said Kenny Frost, a Southern Ute Indian and archaeological law expert, who
addressed Fort Lewis trustees on Wednesday in Gulliford's defense.
Revealing sensitive or sacred information also puts that information at risk
of being dispersed, Frost said.
"If you don't want something told, don't tell it," he added.