- Current reality: What is that feature — a course, program, or support service, for example — like at the present time?
- Ideal state: What would that feature look like if it were (more) women-positive — for example, how would it be designed, who would operate it, and how?
- Understanding the gap: Why is the present reality as it is? What factors are responsible for the gap between the current reality and what you see as the ideal state?
- Bridging the gap: Given your analysis of current reality vs. ideal state, what changes need to be made to bring this feature to the ideal state?
- Realistic action: What action(s) could realistically be taken, especially by you, given the political, resource, and time limitations that characterize your workplace?
Integrate feminist analysis, knowledge, and skills from the course, as well as pertinent theoretical and research knowledge in the proposal. As resources, you have your experience and the knowledge of your situation, as well as the readings from the course and other additional readings.
Course Texts and Booklets
• Briskin, L. (1994). Feminist pedagogy: Teaching and learning liberation. Ottawa, Canada: CRIAW/ICREF. (pdf)
• Burge, E. J., & Haughey, M. (2001). Using learning technologies: International perspectives on practice. London: Routledge/Falmer
• Jenkins, J. (1995). Producing gender sensitive learning materials. Vancouver, BC: Commonwealth of Learning. (pdf)
Unit 1 Readings
Women in Education
Morris, M. (2006, November). New federal policies affecting women’s equality: Reality check. Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of Women (CRIAW), 8, 1-8.
• Why do some people question the need to pay particular attention to women’s education? Why is it important to do so?
• On average, women are paid less than men and are under-represented in doctoral studies, mathematics, sciences and technologies, as well as in positions of power in government and industries. On the other hand, Canadian women today comprise more than half of undergraduate students. How can we account for these two apparently contradictory perspectives?
Optional Reading: The Statistics Canada report below contains more detailed statistical analysis.
Target Groups Project of Statistics Canada (2006). Women in Canada: A gender-based statistical report. Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada.
Why Theory?
Bailey, B., Leo-Rhynie, E., & Morris, J. (1996). Why theory? In Commonwealth of Learning (Eds.), Theoretical perspectives on gender and development (pp. 1-18). Vancouver, BC: Commonwealth of Learning.
• Why do the authors think that theory is important?
• How would feminist theorizing differ from mainstream theorizing?
• Give examples of how assumptions have shaped and biased theory and research.
• How can feminist research and theory avoid the pitfalls of mainstream theory and research?
Gender and Development
Reddock, R. (1996). Why gender? Why development? In Commonwealth of Learning (Eds.), Theoretical perspectives on gender and development (pp. 19-44). Vancouver, BC: Commonwealth of Learning.
• How do feminist theories of development contrast with other post-1945 theories of development?
• What are the various understandings of gender?
• What is the value of considering gender in development? Are some understandings of the concept more useful than others?
• How do the division of labour and power relations differ from one society to another, and within each society?
• Are there some organizational categories that strike you as particularly important?
Post-Structural Feminist Pedagogies
Tisdell, E. J. (1998). Poststructural feminist pedagogies: The possibilities and limitations of feminist emancipatory adult learning theory and practice. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(3),139-156.
• How does the author differentiate between feminist pedagogy and critical pedagogy?
• How coherent and useful do you find her classification of feminist pedagogical theories?
• Why does the author insist that identity and feminism are important in spite of postmodern critiques?
• What are the four key elements of poststructuralist feminist thought? What are the central ideas in each of those elements?
• How does the author reconcile the contradictions in the idea of “voice” in feminist pedagogy?
Reconceiving Feminist Theory and Pedagogy
Fraser, J. M. (2002). Talking relevance: Reconceiving feminist theory and pedagogy. Guidance & Counselling, 17(4), 124-128.
• To what does the author attribute young women’s distrust of feminism, and how does she find that distrust problematic?
• What are the author’s critiques of the social construction of sexuality, on the one hand, and personal experience, on the other?
• How does the author suggest that both social construction of gender and personal experience can inform feminist theory?
• How does her constructionist approach fit with your understanding of people, research, and knowledge?
Sample Solution
