Delegates to the 1907 Catholic Educational Association in Milwaukee expressed a remarkably optimistic mood. The twentieth century seemed to portend the fulfillment of American Catholic educational dreams. The Catholic Church had a magnificent educational past, declared the Reverend William Turner (1871–1936), scholar, religious journalist, professor and librarian at Catholic University, and future bishop of Buffalo, but it had long been distorted by anti-Catholic historians. There was desperate need for an accurate history of Catholic education written by a scholarly Catholic and “from the sources themselves.” Though it was obvious that an historian should write this history, it was even more obvious that this historian also be a professional educator. For “unless the person who writes a history of education has a knowledge of pedagogical methods and has some practice and experience, the history, I think, had better not be written.”

Ever since Nina Vandewalker wrote the first comprehensive history of the American kindergarten in 1908 historians of education have thought of the 1890s as a period of transformation in the theory and practice of kindergarten pedagogy. Historians agree that progressive kindergartners inspired by the child-centered psychologies of G. Stanley Hall and John Dewey initiated a critique of the Froebelian pedagogy upon which the kindergarten curriculum had been based since its introduction into the United States in the 1860s. Historians also agree that by 1920, after a long and sometimes bitter struggle, progressives emerged as victors in the battle with Froebelians for control of the curriculum. What historians have not agreed upon are the social import and educational consequences of this struggle.

It has become increasingly clear in recent years that historians need to devote more effort at presenting the perspective of those who have been the recipients or victims of policies. Yet, except for a few testimonials and oral history presentations, evidence from the recipient's perspective is rare. On the other hand, published reports, correspondence, and other documentary evidence produced by policy makers and implementors is available through conventional sources. In the case of Indian education these sources are hardly overworked, and in spite of the limited view from the top down which they reveal, they say much about the policy makers purposes, and the policies themselves.