Readings

Gender **1. American Association of University Women. (2009). How schools shortchange girls: Three** **perspectives on curriculum. In D. J. Flinders & S. J. Thornton (Eds.),** **// The //****curriculum studies reader (3rd ed., pp. 214-236). New York: RoutledgeFalmer. (read by all) (Kelly) **

** Kelly's Summary **This article focuses on the consequence of curriculum and teaching not taking into account gender differences. The curriculum should provide students with "windows out onto the experiences of others and mirrors of her or his own reality and validity. Few curriculums mirror women for female students. According to Gretchen Wilbur gender fair curriculum acknowledges and affirms variation, is inclusive in that it allows both female and male students to find and identify positively with messages about themselves (can we add LGBTQ students here as well?), is accurate, is affirmative, is representative of, and it’s integrated by weaving together the experiences of both males and females. Attempts that have been made to reform curriculum but have been not been successful. Several factors are impeding successful gender equity in the curriculum: a reluctance for students to be singled out or gender experience that does not fit the assumed norms; teachers lack of training on multicultural and gender-neutral goals and techniques; unwillingness to commit funds to this issue. Gender biased curriculum and classroom experiences, activities that are designed to appeal to boys' interests are more often selected, and male female student interaction in school leads to lower self esteem in girls. A few suggestions on what teachers can do such as making homogeneous grouping and being proactive about the way male students treat female students are offered. It lists several issues and implies they are a result of this gender bias in education (and society)--substance abuse, body image/eating disorders, depression and suicide. It concludes by stating that "gender politics is a subject that many in our schools prefer to ignore but if we do not begin to discuss more openly the ways in which ascribed power, whether on the basis of race, sex, class, sexual orientation, or religion, affects individual lives, we will not be truly preparing our students for citizenship in a democracy" (p.230)

2. de Freitas, E. (2004). (Dis)locating gender within the universal: teaching philosophy through narrative. // Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 2 // (2), 61-72. Retrieved from []

(Cynthia
 * Cynthia's comment (I'm not bothering to summarize):**
 * Here is a quote from this article, which I vote we don't use!**

The feminine, according to Cavarero, is discursively constituted as the concrete, the particular, the narratable self, that Other which philosophy seeks to redeem through the universal. She is not essentializing the feminine, but rather historicizing it within the tradition of “rational discourse”. Gender and power relations are thus enacted through the continual re-establishment of this discursive opposition between narrative and reason.

**3.Gaskell, J. (2004). Educational change and the women's movement: Lessons from British** **Columbia schools in the 1970s. (Kelly)**
 * // Educational Policy, 18 // (2), 291-310. ****doi:10.1177/0895904803262144 (**** [] ) (read by all) **


 * Kelly's Summary **

This is a research study on the impact the women's movement had on education in the 1970s in BC. 16 women who were considered to be key players in the women's movement were interviewed. A report in 1970 from the Federally appointed Royal Commission on the Status of Women made 32 recommendations for action including eliminating stereotypes in textbooks and career counseling as well as greater participation of women in educational administration, math, science and technology (p.296). This report became a rallying point for the women's movement in Canada because it articulated issues in a government sanctioned report, it produced government resources and it aroused public opposition that united women activists. A group of women from across the province rallied together and formed the Status of Women to bring about change. A grassroots group called Women in Teaching (WIT) had a dramatic impact on the BCTF. Together these two groups were able to bring about change for education.

4.Kehler, M.D., Davison, K.G., & Frank, B. (2005). Contradictions and tensions in the practice of masculinities in school: Interrogating embodiment and 'good buddy talk'. // JCT, 21 // (4), 59- 72. Retrieved July 10, 2011, from ProQuest Education Journals. (Document ID:994277591). (Brenda)

This paper summarizes previous work and outlines a research study following the lives of young men ages 16 - 20. The goal was to make visible "the contradictions and tensions of the lived lives of young men in high school" (p.59). They also wanted to highlight "the practices of young men who have engaged counter-hegemonic masculintiy in school" (p. 59). One way masculinity is communicated is through 'bodily practices'. Exceling in gym class and being 'big and strong' are seen as being masculine. Language also helps to construct gender. Verbal exchanges may include sexual discussions about girls they've been with. Often it includes sexist and homophobic discourse. Social positioning and behavior also establish masculinity, e.g. laughing a certain way may be girlish, one boy 'carried his books like a girl' and quickly learned to change. The boys in this study confirmed that school was not a safe place to talk openly about masculinity. Teachers were cautioned for using phrases like, "Boys will be boys". Most interesting was that males of privilege were more open to "challenge the rigidity of hegemonic masculinity so that it is more inclusive, most importantly more inclusive of themselves and their individual gendered practices" (p. 63).
 * Brenda's Summary**

5.Kelly, D.M., & Pomerantz, S. (2009). Mean, wild, and alienated: Girls and the state of feminism in popular culture. (Kelly)

// Girlhood Studies, 2 // (1), 1-19. []


 * Kelly's Summary**

I must confess when I first started reading this article I was not seeing the connection between curriculum/education and gender but now I think this is one of the areas I hope we can explore in our presentation---but beyond just looking at girls --- How can curriculum and education counteract what popular culture is telling us is girl, LGBTQ, and, even boy behavior?

This article explores the films __Mean Girls__ (2004), __Thirteen__ (2003) and __Ghost World__ (2001) in order to examine the current constructions of power made available to girls. Asking what these representations have to say about girls and feminism in the 21st century the author emphasizes the obvious readings put forth by these films: girls as mean, girls as wild, and girls as alienated" (p.2). They go on to state that these popular culture films go beyond mere entertainment and, instead, become a mode by which our thoughts about girls and girls thoughts about themselves are formed, organized and solidified. (That mirror idea from //How Schools Shortchange Girls//?)They then examine how females are portrayed in each of the movies and point out that the lack of any credible feminist discourse in these films translates to a lack of authoritative feminist discourse for "real girls" one that foregrounds possibilities of social and not just individual change. Girls do not get much, if any, exposure to feminism in school. Popular culture offers girls the chance to become exposed to ideas and identities that might otherwise be closed to them. Girls are not being exposed to counter stories that might help them imagine a different world at home, at school or in their interactions with boys and other girls.

**6.Kelly, D.M., Pomerantz, S., & Currie, D.H. (2006). “No boundaries”? Girls’ interactive, online learning about femininities.**

__**“No Boundaries”? Girls’ Interactive, Online Learning about Femininities**__ In this study, the authors looked at interview transcripts from 16 Canadian girls, aged 13-15 years old who were self-described as ‘computer girls’ having an interest in computers or online activities. Essentially, the authors were exploring issues of femininity that take place in the presence of others online (through chat rooms, instant messaging, and role-laying games). They focused on the girls’ talk about “feeling powerful or vulnerable online and the implications of these experiences in their offline social interactions.” (p. 9). The authors theorized that the two environments (online & offline) influenced each other. “Girls reported that online activities allowed them to rehearse different ways of being before trying them out offline, where they might heave been reined in for going against perceived expectations for the gender.” (p. 3). “The girls in this study enjoyed playing with gender and being gender rebellious.” (p. 4). They also practiced taking on more initiative in heterosexual relationships online and battled back against sexual harassment. Girls reported that alternative femininities that they practiced online contributed positively to their personal growth. Online, some girls were more extroverted and confident than they might have been otherwise. They felt like they had more control and could mask feelings or communicate better with boys than during face-to-face. Some found that they could take time to process their thoughts better and “not sound like a complete goon.” (p. 17). They were more in control of their social interactions with boys. Some girls felt that using online formats helped them to become more outgoing and more comfortable around boys. The authors state that the girls’ improvisations represent “potential beginnings of an altered identity” but that the girls did not often act on it. Girls need access to feminist discourses that name their experiences and feelings in the search for gender justice. The authors suggest a pedagogy that structures learning opportunities to spotlight directly gender and power issues and to prompt deeper reflections about the social construction of gender.
 * // Youth & Society, 38 // (1), 3-28. [] (Margaret)**

**7.*McIntosh, P. (2009). Gender perspectives on educating for global citizenship. In D. J. Flinders & S. J. Thornton (Eds.),** __**Gender Perspectives on Educating for Global Citizenship**__ This was a difficult read, in part due to the disinterest I have in this particular aspect of gender study and also due to the fact that it is 1:00 in the morning. As far as I can tell, the author asks what it would take to be global citizens, since we are living on a shrinking planet due to technology. She associates global citizenship with capacities of mind, heart, physical body and spiritual soul. She states that these qualities are gender related. In order to educate global citizens, students need to be taught the skills of working for, and wanting, the commonwealth, the well-being of all (p. 387). This includes providing, and caring about providing, the basic human necessities. One problem with this is that these values undermine the innate nature of boys/men. Another problem is that Americans think global citizenship has less appeal than global leadership. The author criticizes Americans as having no understanding of global citizenship, of belonging within an entity larger than the nation itself (p. 389). The US has an ideology of individualism; the individual is the unit of society. What is necessary for teachers is to develop global sensibility. The author asks the question: “How can we make school climate, teaching methods, and curricula more gender-fair, multicultural and global?” (p. 389). She describes SEEDS seminars for global citizenship education with help people develop both identities of the own and interconnectedness with others. She states that children have an interest with children of other countries and like to work on collaborative projects and thus are responding to global education. The authors sees hope for the future in curricula that has become more international, cross-cultural, and serious about women. She urges us not to give up on young people even if they do not want to become global citizens, that change is possible. It is our job to help students see they are connected to the world in a way that matters, and that the world is wroth caring about (p. 397).
 * // The curriculum studies reader // (3rd ed., pp. 385-398). New York: RoutledgeFalmer. (Margaret)**

8.Upitis, R. (2001). Girls (and boys) and technology (and toys). // Canadian Journal of Education, //26 (3). Retrieved July 10, 2011, from ProQuest Education Journals. (Document ID: 636286501). **(Brenda)** Brenda's summary: Due to the changes in technology since this study was conducted(1994/95), I find it quite dated. This study looked at a grade 7/8 class who were assigned an inquiry project to create and market a toy. The researchers looked at how students used technology (above and beyond what was expected of them, e.g. a journal and advertisements). Four female researchers sat in on the class and tracked student activity. They zeroed in on four students (two male, two female) to represent the 'full range of technology use." In the final discussion the researchers state: "most children were able to become engaged through the expression of traditional gender preferences (both in terms of toys and technology)."........"The wide variety of computer use appeared to disrupt some of the typical gender-technology patterns identified in the literature review..." (the lit. review concluded that boys were more apt to use technology, technology was viewed more as a boy activity.... The final conclusion points out that project-based learning that is engaging and purposeful and appealing has the potential to 'shift girls' views of themselves as users of computer technology. Teachers are recommended to develop units like this so that traditional gender roles can be expressed and changed.

9.Young, K. (2005). Curriculum of imperialism: Good girl citizens and the making of the literary educated imagination. // Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies //, 3(2), 41-53. Retrieved from [] **(Brenda)****Brenda's Summary**I have never been in Brownies or Girl Guides so may not relate to this as well as others. This study looked at how 'the story' which is acted out through membership in the Brownies supported Imperialism and trained girls to be "good girls". The writer claims that cultural forms (e.g. rituals of the Brownie organization) help to form identity. The author bases the work on her own experiences in the Brownie movement which taught her to "assimilate and be obedient while learning to be independent and capable" (p.42). These attitudes are considered to be 'Imperial habits of mind'. Connections are made to patriotism/nationalism and the advancement of a patriarchal society through the institutionalized view of gender put forth in schools and organizations like Brownies. Like the Brownies of folklore she was taught to take care of the home, help others, be of service to the community. Girls were taught to cook and sew as well as build a campfire. There was even an 'economic' side to Brownies, e.g. uniforms earning badges, weekly dues... She ends by asking student teacher candidates to consider their own experiences with the girl guide movement and how it contributes to identity formation.


 * 10.Thornton, S. (2009). Silence on gays and lesbians in social studies curriculum. In D. J. Flinders & S. J. Thornton (Eds.), //The curriculum studies reader// (3rd ed., pp. 362-367). New York: Ro****utledgeFalmer. (Cynthia)**

Current school curricula and practice built on heteronormativity --"the belief that the archetypal human is straight" (p.362) -- denies inclusive education to those with differing sexual orientations. The author points out that the social studies curriculum used to reflect the superiority of the white Anglo-Saxon male. While it now reflects the multicultural, multi-ethnic, multi-faith, and of course female aspects of American society, official curriculum still ignores gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered individuals. Thornton says, ‘“Educators must answer the question, “Does everybody count as human?”’ (p. 363).

Social studies curriculum is supposed to embrace change and reflect contemporary society. Its curriculum offers many opportunities to combat heteronormativity. One strategy is to integrate study of the contributions of and issues faced by important historical figures who were gay or lesbian into topics already taught in schools. Another is the issue of human rights. While the denial of human rights to women in Muslim countries is frequently discussed in schools, the denial of those same rights to gay men is not.

Educators must also work to counteract the “hidden curriculum everybody sees” (p. 364) which ignores or tacitly condones homophobic behaviour. At-risk LGBTQ youth should be able to count on teachers and librarians for support and educational inclusion, especially in the face of anti-gay pressures from some parents and religious groups. Teachers can choose to use gay-themed materials to support curricular outcomes, not only to be inclusive of all students but to show respect for families with gay or lesbian parents. Either we change how we teach or risk students who go from K-12 learning from only the prejudicial curriculum.

media type="youtube" key="jQ4KhR6OBcU" height="248" width="338" align="left"

media type="youtube" key="BD0tnx1Mf8I" height="247" width="337" align="left"

media type="youtube" key="Jh7k1GIl-xQ" height="248" width="338" align="left"