(EN)GENDER(ING) COMPLEXITIES, CONTRADICTIONS AND MULTIPLICITIES: MY [A RESEARCHER’S] FEMINIST POSTSTRUCTURAL STORIES OF/FOR TEACHING GENDER AND/WITHIN MULTICULTURAL TEACHER EDUCATION By Christine Marie Pereira A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Curriculum, Teaching and Educational Policy – Doctor of Philosophy 2013 ABSTRACT (EN)GENDER(ING) COMPLEXITIES, CONTRADICTIONS AND MULTIPLICITIES: MY [A RESEARCHER’S] FEMINIST POSTSTRUCTURAL STORIES OF/FOR TEACHING GENDER AND/WITHIN MULTICULTURAL TEACHER EDUCATION By Christine Marie Pereira This dissertation explores how multiple lenses enable more nuanced understandings of gender that multicultural education, and by extension multicultural teacher education, will benefit from. In answering the question, “What was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course?” the teaching of gender within a particular multicultural teacher education course is analyzed using three theoretical frames – Liberal Feminism, Womanism, and Postmodern Feminism. To understand and articulate multiple stories related to gender and education within the context of multicultural teacher education, this study is methodologically framed through feminist poststructuralism. Specific research goals that stem from this approach include: a focus on issues of gender, an examination of the multiplicity of gendered identities/positionalities, an exploration of the complexities, contradictions, and contexts of identities and positionalities, and a consideration of my own subjectivities as a researcher. This research pushes the boundaries of qualitative research as it is written in large part as a playlike piece of performance art. The format and performativity afford this dissertation a creative space to demonstrate an innovative approach to qualitative research analysis, writing and utility. The play (1) answers the question, “What was taught about gender in this multicultural education course?” (2) demonstrates multiple ways of answering the question, and (3) allows readers to see/ascertain for themselves answers to the question. The script of the play is based largely on the transcript of two class sessions of an actual multicultural/urban teacher education course. These two days of a semester-long course were focused specifically on the topic of gender. Through the play layout, it is easy to see how the theoretical perspectives (Womanism, Postmodern Feminism, and Liberal Feminism) interact with the content and dynamics within the classroom experiences. This format and structure of the project and the writing also allows the interactivity of knowledge, power, and discourse of feminist poststructural methodologies to be enacted with and for the readers and observers of the research. A case study such as this opens up possibilities for teacher educators, researchers, and even teacher candidates to think more complexly about conceptions of gender, gender and teacher education, and gender and education more broadly. This, in turn, opens the fields of Multicultural Education and Multicultural Teacher Education to the possibilities of looking at gender issues more complexly. Further, this study extends and deepens understandings of Liberal Feminism, Womanism, and Postmodern Feminism within the realms of education, as well as adds to the limited number of studies that engage feminist poststructural methodologies of research within educational research. This study urges educators to address issues of gender and education from multiple perspectives, presenting and discussing multiple voices, and engaging and evoking gender as constructed within a multiplicity of harmonizing and contradicting discourses and power relations. Key words: Gender, Womanism, Poststructuralism, Multicultural Education, Feminism, Teacher Education Copyright by CHRISTINE MARIE PEREIRA 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST  OF  TABLES.….…………………………………………………………………………………………………....ix     LIST  OF  FIGURES.….…………………………………………………………………………………………………....x     Prologue .................................................................................................................................................. 1   Researcher Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 My (Partial) Story ..................................................................................................................... 2 What’s In a Name? ................................................................................................................... 4 Research Question .................................................................................................................... 5   Gender  and  Multicultural  Teacher  Education............................................................................ 6   Multicultural Education........................................................................................................... 6 Multicultural Education Beyond Race and Ethnicity ........................................................... 8 Gender and Multicultural Education ..................................................................................... 8 Gender and Multicultural Teacher Education....................................................................... 9   Complexities,  Contradictions  and  Multiplicities .....................................................................11   Liberal Feminism .................................................................................................................... 11 Gender bias and discrimination studies within teacher education. ............................... 13 Curriculum. ...................................................................................................................... 13 Implications for teacher education.................................................................................. 14 Teacher educator perspectives......................................................................................... 15 Womanism ............................................................................................................................... 15 Gender as one of multiple aspects of identity studies within teacher education........... 18 Postmodern Feminism ............................................................................................................ 19 Gendered power relations studies within teacher education. ......................................... 22 Three Distinct Yet Overlapping Perspectives ...................................................................... 23   Method(s)/(ologies)..........................................................................................................................23   Situating My Study ................................................................................................................. 23 Feminist Poststructuralism .................................................................................................... 25 Power and knowledge. ........................................................................................................ 25 Language and discourse. .................................................................................................... 26 Subjectivity. ......................................................................................................................... 27 Feminist Poststructural Methodology................................................................................... 27 Focus on gender................................................................................................................... 27 Multiplicity of voice and stories......................................................................................... 28 v Participant involvement. .................................................................................................... 28 Researcher subjectivity. ..................................................................................................... 29 Data Collection ........................................................................................................................ 29 Videotaping.......................................................................................................................... 29 Field notes. ........................................................................................................................... 30 Course artifacts. .................................................................................................................. 30 Student coursework. ........................................................................................................... 31 Interviews............................................................................................................................. 32 Data Analysis........................................................................................................................... 32 Operationalizing the research question. ........................................................................... 33 Locations of analysis. .......................................................................................................... 36 Interrogating researcher subjectivities. ............................................................................ 37 Ethical considerations......................................................................................................... 37 Trustworthiness. ................................................................................................................. 38 Prolonged engagement and persistent observation in the field. .................................... 38 Triangulation. .................................................................................................................. 38 Peer review. ...................................................................................................................... 39 Negative case analysis...................................................................................................... 39 Clarifying researcher bias. .............................................................................................. 39 Member checks................................................................................................................. 39 External audits. ................................................................................................................ 40 Rich, thick description. .................................................................................................... 40 Setting  the  Scene.................................................................................................................................40   Participants.............................................................................................................................. 42 Instructor. ............................................................................................................................ 42 Students................................................................................................................................ 43 Playing with Gender(ed) Stories............................................................................................ 44 An analytic reading............................................................................................................. 44 A teaching tool..................................................................................................................... 46   Act  1:  Day  One  (10/14).....................................................................................................................55   Scene 1: Set Up Day One – Guiding Questions .................................................................... 55 Scene 1: Set Up Day One – Script.......................................................................................... 57 Scene 1: Set Up Day One – Reflections ................................................................................. 64 Scene 2: Free Writing – Guiding Questions ......................................................................... 67 Scene 2: Free Writing – Script............................................................................................... 68 Scene 2: Free Writing – Reflections ...................................................................................... 90 Scene 3: Stereotyping – Guiding Questions.......................................................................... 93 Scene 3: Stereotyping – Script ............................................................................................... 94 Scene 3: Stereotyping – Reflections..................................................................................... 106 Scene 4: Sex/Gender – Guiding Questions ......................................................................... 108 Scene 4: Sex/Gender – Script ............................................................................................... 109 Scene 4: Sex/Gender – Reflections....................................................................................... 127 Scene 5: Tough Guise – Guiding Questions........................................................................ 130 Scene 5: Tough Guise – Script ............................................................................................. 131 vi Scene 5: Tough Guise – Reflections..................................................................................... 145   Act  2:  Day  Two  (10/16) ................................................................................................................. 148   Scene 1: Set Up Day Two – Guiding Questions.................................................................. 148 Scene 1: Set Up Day Two – Script ....................................................................................... 149 Scene 1: Set Up Day Two – Reflections............................................................................... 153 Scene 2: Hidden: A Gender – Guiding Questions.............................................................. 154 Scene 2: Hidden: A Gender – Script ................................................................................... 156 Scene 2: Hidden: A Gender – Reflections........................................................................... 183 Scene 3: Killing Us Softly 3 – Guiding Questions .............................................................. 187 Scene 3: Killing Us Softly 3 – Script.................................................................................... 188 Scene 3: Killing Us Softly 3 – Reflections ........................................................................... 206 Scene 4: Assigned Readings – Guiding Questions ............................................................. 209 Scene 4: Assigned Readings – Script................................................................................... 210 Scene 4: Assigned Readings – Reflections .......................................................................... 221 Scene 5: Debrief – Guiding Questions................................................................................. 223 Scene 5: Debrief – Script ...................................................................................................... 223 Scene 5: Debrief – Reflections.............................................................................................. 233   Epilogue.............................................................................................................................................. 236   Instructor Reflections ........................................................................................................... 236 Researcher Interrogations and Extensions......................................................................... 237 Interview with the Playwright. ........................................................................................ 238 Methodological and Theoretical Moves. ....................................................................... 238 Analysis and Writing Moves. ......................................................................................... 250 Reflective Musings. ........................................................................................................ 259 Act 1, Scene 2: Free Writing [Take Two] – Guiding Questions. .................................. 264 Act 1, Scene 2: Free Writing [Take Two] – Script......................................................... 266 Act 1, Scene 2: Free Writing [Take Two] – Reflections. ............................................... 298 Act 1, Scene 2: Free Writing [Take Two] – Meta-Analysis........................................... 303 Researcher Reflections ......................................................................................................... 307 What Was Taught about Gender in Teacher Education? ............................................ 307 Implications: So What? .................................................................................................... 313 Limitations......................................................................................................................... 315 Conclusions............................................................................................................................ 316   APPENDICES...................................................................................................................................... 317   Appendix A: Play Coding Key............................................................................................. 318 Appendix B: Teaching Guide............................................................................................... 319 Appendix C: Instructor Syllabus......................................................................................... 339 Appendix D: Week 8 Lesson Plans...................................................................................... 352 Appendix E: Online Posting Prompts ................................................................................. 356 Appendix F: Who Was Called On, Instructor Response and Response Type Table ..... 357 Appendix F: Time Speaking and Instructor Response Table........................................... 359 vii Appendix H: Hands Raised, Called On, and Speaking Instances Table ......................... 360 Appendix I: Peer Conversation Pairs ................................................................................. 361 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................... 362     viii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Operationalizing the Research Question....................................................................35 Table 2: Locations of Analysis....................................................................................................36 Table 3: Cast of Characters........................................................................................................52 Table 4: Responding to the Research Question......................................................................311 Table 5: Week 8 Lesson Plans..................................................................................................352 Table 6: Who Was Called On, Instructor Response and Response Type............................357 Table 7: Time Speaking and Instructor Response.................................................................359 ix LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Position of Participants and Video Cameras in the Classroom..............................30 Figure 2: 10/14 Seating Chart.....................................................................................................53 Figure 3: 10/16 Seating Chart.....................................................................................................54 x Prologue “We teach who we are.” Parker Palmer “Be the change you wish to see in the world.” Ghandi Researcher Introduction Educational research has deep potential to create social and personal change. This contribution is no exception. In fact, that is the overarching expectation and underlying drive behind its presentation. For a doctoral candidate seeking to make a significant impact on the world, the writing of a dissertation must hold a certain purpose and value beyond the completion of a degree. My research folds and unfolds multiple aspects of my lives as a student, teacher, and scholar. As a bridge among and between areas of personal and professional expertise, interest, and experience, I explore issues of gender and education, specifically what is taught about gender within multicultural teacher education. In doing so, I have found that there is a great amount of complexity and richness in this work that has yet to be examined in great detail. There is much that has yet to be told about the teaching of gender within teacher education and opening this discussion can thus serve as a catalyst for social and educational transformation. The ways that we talk about gender in multicultural teacher education are often limited and therefore leave open multiple possibilities for extension and expansion. This dissertation points to arenas that enrich and enliven our understandings of teachings about gender. What you will find in these pages are stories – stories of a teacher, stories of students, stories of a researcher, and stories of the intersections of these positions and people. These stories, along with the stories of content and context, construct views of what is taught about gender within a multicultural teacher education course. The presentation of these views allows for curiosity and interrogation about what is seen, how and by whom. Further, looking at, into and through stories 1 can bring to life the multiplicity of perspectives on events, identities, locations and interactions. All of this to say, educational research can be generative as well as descriptive. And, this research is one example of how educational researchers might conduct and write research in ways that open doors for teachers and students to question and challenge themselves, each other, and others toward transformative pedagogies within and beyond Multicultural Teacher Education. My (Partial) Story As an undergraduate at the University of New Hampshire, I double-majored in Women’s Studies and Political Science. It was there I began to explore issues of gender both personally and academically. I was also a part of a tutoring program for “at risk” girls within a local school district. As sophomores, my peers and I (all women) were paired with sixth graders (all girls) to tutor them in math and science. Through this program I began to read books including “Reviving Ophelia” that positioned girls as disadvantaged and in need of support (both emotionally and academically) to succeed within schools and society. I was paired with LaShaun (this is a pseudonym), one of the only African American students in the school. Racial diversity being what it is in New Hampshire, quite sparse, LaShaun was used to being in the minority. What she could not understand was why she was chosen to be in the tutoring program. At first I wondered too, but then it became clear to me. Although LaShaun was a stellar student all around, and particularly in the subjects of math and science, she was considered to be “at risk” because she and her brother were being raised by their single black mother. It was through this experience that my understandings of the complex and sometimes contradictory relationship between gender and education began to deepen. 2 Entering into graduate school I identified myself as a radical postmodern feminist. I was an activist for more issues and causes than I can name (including gender, race, disability, and sexual orientation) and lived my politics on multiple levels – embodied, academically, and professionally. It was my plight to eradicate issues of injustice against all people. I educated myself, and others, about social issues and to understand the contexts that produced and maintained inequalities. At the same time, I sought to deconstruct language, meaning, and difference in ways that could destabilize dominant paradigms and discourses in order to open up possibilities for change, resistance, and liberation. But, since I had a full-time job on the side of all of this, I was exhausted. This is when I decided that becoming a teacher educator was something that both appealed to the educator and the activist in me. From 2004 to 2010 I concurrently taught and studied in the Department of Teacher Education at a Midwestern Research I university. I predominantly taught a course called I commonly described this course, for better or worse, as the required multicultural issues in education course for undergraduate teacher education students. It was both the most challenging and most rewarding experience of my doctoral studies. The opportunity to work with future teachers and to engage them in conversations relevant to social issues related to education was amazing. The fact that this was the only course in their curriculum that was required to include these issues, however, placed a huge weight on the one semester I spent with them. Given that gender has been my area of specialization, I was particularly interested in how to strengthen and broaden the conceptions of gender issues within education presented in the course. Typically instructors of the course spent one, maybe two, class sessions talking specifically about gender. Additionally, issues of gender were often included in ways that were disconnected from other issues and theoretical perspectives addressed through the course. 3 It is as a result of all of these aspects of myself and life experiences that I come to this particular study at this particular time. I bring with me my memories of the three years I spent tutoring (or moreso mentoring and learning from) LaShaun, my life as an activist and educator, my days spent as a teacher educator related to issues of diversity, power, and opportunity, and much more. It is through this study, that I am attempting to explain both the value and the complexity of the relationship between gender and teacher education. I want to be able to hold my experiences as a student and a teacher of feminist ideals and activism along side the experiences of students like LaShaun and many others who don’t appear to fit within the commonsense or theoretical understandings that many people bring to discussions of gender and education. For that, I think that it is important to look at gender and education, and by extension gender and multicultural education and gender and teacher education, through multiple theoretical lenses. Perhaps part of the story can be told through one lens that cannot be explained, or even seen, through another. This is my hope. What’s In a Name? I love words. The way they lay and play together like a combination of notes and melodies emerging from multiple instruments at a time. I see titles, as in the title to this dissertation, as the windows into a piece of writing. They must necessarily allow a reader to see into the writing through the words, carefully chosen and placed, crafted to evoke curiosity in reading on. If you have read this far, I am hoping that I have sparked your interest in the content and format of this dissertation. Still, you may want to hear more about how I put together the title and some of my ponderings about what meanings you may draw from it prior to, during, and/or after reading it, the title that is, and/or the entirety of this work. (EN)GENDER(ING) COMPLEXITIES, CONTRADICTIONS AND MULTIPLICITIES: 4 MY [A RESEARCHER’S] FEMINIST POSTSTRUCTURAL STORIES OF/FOR TEACHING GENDER AND/WITHIN MULTICULTURAL TEACHER EDUCATION I’ll start at the end. The context within which this study sits is Teacher Education, Multicultural Teacher Education to be specific. Then comes gender and Teacher Education overlapping with the context, because, you see, I cannot speak of content outside of context (nor vice versa). And, although my primary area of interest within this writing is the topic of gender, inherently teaching Multicultural Teacher Education also interplays as context, content, as well as methodology and pedagogy to interrogate and demonstrate gender. Then come the stories. The stories presented here are both for and about the teaching of gender. And, these stories come to being as a result of my own inclination toward feminist poststructural methodological, pedagogical and ideological curiosities as a researcher. And, although they are stories about many events, people and are written through various theoretical lenses, ultimately they are all filtered through my own eyes, ears, and hands as I am the author of this piece of educational research. At this point, I’m guessing that the nuances provided by the words complex, contradictory and multiple are becoming more present in your mind. It is my aim to raise, question and juxtapose ways of thinking and looking at gender through this dissertation. Thus, to actively foster, or engender, these complexities, contradictions and multiplicities about and within gender. So there you have it. Now let’s move onto the work itself. Research Question In my study I set out to understand better how multiple lenses, in particular these three lenses – liberal feminist, womanist, and postmodern feminist – might enable more nuanced interpretations of gender that multicultural education, and by extension multicultural teacher education, could benefit from. My study aims to speak to the following question: 5 What was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course? To answer this question is to explore several concepts including, but not limited to, those described in my explanation of the title of this dissertation in the previous section. Exploring and adding to the research on gender and education is crucial, both personally and professionally. And, answering the question about what was taught about gender and education from multiple perspectives opens this research to a whole other level of interrogation and analysis. The context, of course, is one particular multicultural teacher education course. Situating this study within this course also bridges discourses within the fields of multicultural education, multicultural teacher education, and teacher education, to name a few. As a result, it is first necessary to situate this study within the current and relevant literature on gender and multicultural teacher education. Gender and Multicultural Teacher Education Within multicultural teacher education, students are taught about gender. This is an indisputable fact. How much, in what ways, and what exactly is taught about gender within teacher preparation is, as of yet, an under-researched topic. What you will find within these pages are several approaches, stories and approaches to stories about the teaching of gender within a particular multicultural teacher education course. Multicultural Education The field of Multicultural Education has a short, but complex history. “Multicultural education is a young domain of studies, only about 25 years old. As with most new areas of study, multicultural education is emerging and struggling with its identity” (Boyle-Baise, 1999, p. 192). In her article, “Bleeding boundaries or uncertain center? A historical exploration of multicultural education” (1999), Boyle-Baise interviewed scholars who have been associated 6 with the field of Multicultural Education for some time and whose contributions have been widely read and cited. She conducted this study in order to better understand the history, goals, and future of the field of Multicultural Education from the eyes of its most active and well renowned researchers. Her participants were James Banks, Christine Bennett, Carlos Cortes, Geneva Gay, Donna Gollnick, Carl Grant, Wilma Longstreet and Christine Sleeter. Boyle-Baise discusses the differences of opinion that exist about what should be at the core of multicultural education. What she found through interviews with these major contributors to the field was that although there is a “solid, yet debated, center,” within the field about the purposes and parameters of Multicultural Education (Boyle-Baise, 1999). Certain multiculturalists purport that issues of race and ethnicity have been and should remain central to the field. The inclusion of issues such as disability and gender, are seen in some ways as threatening to the integrity of multicultural education. Within their writing these authors allude to and name the ways in which the field of multicultural education has been more eclectic and inclusive, especially in more recent research and practice. However, the authors still predominantly choose in different ways and to different extents to expand upon and foreground issues of race and ethnicity. In many ways it appears the authors are willing to talk about the changes and expansion of the goals and focus of the field of multicultural education, but are still largely content with race and ethnicity remaining central to the discussion. The reality is that much of what is known as multicultural education today emerged from previous initiatives such as ethnic studies, inter-group studies, and multiethnic education. However, the pointed, and in many ways explicit, decisions scholars make to draw on or develop further examples and models of multicultural education focused predominantly on racial and ethnic diversity perpetuates and reinforces a view of the field that centers on these issues. And, 7 though there have been disputes about what the foci of Multicultural Education are, predominantly scholarship has focused on educational inequality (both historic and contemporary) related to racial and ethnic groups. Multicultural Education Beyond Race and Ethnicity Some Multicultural Education scholars make more overt and distinctive choices to include issues beyond those of race and ethnicity in their writing. Gender has, at least in name, been a consistent component of Multicultural Education. The work of prominent scholars in the field discusses the importance of viewing gender among the multiple identity characteristics and social issues that must be addressed within multicultural education (Nieto, 2004; Gollnick & Chinn, 2002; Sleeter & Grant, 2003; Banks & Banks, 2005). Gender is included along with issues of race and ethnicity, social class, disability, linguistic diversity, and sexual orientation. Substantively, however, issues of gender are talked about far less frequently within Multicultural Education literature. Although gender is alluded to, and included to an extent in some sections of the authors’ writing, these issues, as well as content related to sexual orientation, social class, ability, and language, are largely set aside or assumed to be adequately subsumed by the topics of race and ethnicity. Most often, when aspects of difference are discussed, authors are talking about race and ethnicity. Gender and Multicultural Education The most frequently cited scholars within Multicultural Education on the topic of gender in education are David and Myra Sadker, especially their groundbreaking 1980 work “Failing at Fairness: How America’s School’s Cheat Girls. In all of the Multicultural Education texts that I have read for teaching and research purposes, I have noticed that when gender issues are explicitly highlighted within the field, their work on gender bias is almost always included. More 8 generally, gender issues are discussed within much the same theoretical framework whenever they are included in scholarship within Multicultural Education, maintaining a clear focus on educational inequality (Banks & Banks, 2004; Banks & Banks, 2005; Boyle-Baise, 1999; Gollnick & Chinn, 2002; Nieto, 2004; Sleeter & Grant, 2003). At the forefront of the issues presented are gender discrimination (both within and beyond educational institutions), equal educational opportunities for students regardless of gender, and issues of inclusion and exclusion related to gender and education. So why is this important to know? Well, there are advantages and disadvantages to this monolithic inclusion of issues of gender within multicultural education. In the sections that follow, I will highlight the benefits of focusing on issues of gender inequality as well as ways to extend and expand our discourses and understanding of gender in multicultural education. Gender and Multicultural Teacher Education Teacher education programs that have been committed to teaching for social justice include gender, as well as many other social issues, along the same framework as the field of Multicultural Education (Sanders, 1997; Mader & King, 1995; Hollingsworth, 1995). More often than not, issues of educational equality are at the forefront with a lesser emphasis on identity and difference as positionalities co-constructed and performed minute by minute or as multiple identities that are mutually constitutive and contextually specific. Thus, the lens typically used to see and describe gender within multicultural education, and by extension multicultural teacher education, has been one I would identify as liberal feminist. I’ll explain what I mean by this in more detail in a little while. Approaching issues of gender identity and difference from the perspective of inequality has positively impacted Multicultural Education, and the scholarship on education more broadly. 9 Addressing sexism, gender bias, gender discrimination, sexual harassment, and other important topics related to gender and education has altered classrooms and schools for the better (Sadker, Sadker & Klein, 1991). Although there is still more work to be done in this regard, it is clear that teachers and administrators have become more aware of how gender bias impacts the schooling of their students, and programs have been implemented to counter these impacts (Zittleman & Sadker, 2003). It is, however, only one approach to looking at issues of gender in education. In this study, I look at what is taught about gender within a multicultural teacher education classroom setting through three theoretical perspectives – Liberal Feminism, Womanism, and Postmodern Feminism. It is my goal to broaden and deepen understandings and constructions of gender within this context so as to add to the theory and research on gender within multicultural teacher education, and by extension multicultural education at large. Within the field of Teacher Education there has been little research conducted on the topic of gender. Of the scholarship produced, there are even fewer studies that have gender as the sole or primary focus. Of what has been written, scholarship falls broadly into three categories – gender bias and discrimination, gender as one of multiple aspects of identity, and gendered power relations. These lines of inquiry mirror the theoretical perspectives I am employing in this work in that gender bias and discrimination thematically align with liberal feminist theory, gender as one of multiple aspects of identity aligns with womanist theory, and gendered power relations aligns with postmodern feminist theory. In the sections that follow, I will expand upon the theoretical discussion of the three lenses as they relate specifically to Teacher Education and the relevant scholarship within the field. 10 Complexities, Contradictions and Multiplicities Liberal Feminism Liberal Feminism, born out of the political theory of liberalism, is a perspective that focuses on equality between men and women. Women’s rights and access to equal opportunities and society have been fought for and achieved by people supporting Liberal Feminism. Discrimination against women in sectors including education, employment, and politics are some of the main issues that have been combated by Liberal Feminism. Particular to education, there has been much attention paid to whether or not boys and girls are treated equally and afforded the same opportunities to succeed within and beyond the classroom. Studies have been done on issues such as the participation of girls and boys in classroom discussions, the academic achievement gap between girls and boys, the amount and quality of attention that teachers give to students in relation to gender, issues of sexual harassment in schools, and the language that teachers use to refer to boy and girl students in their classes. Stories of gender bias and discrimination against girls in schooling have emerged through this theoretical lens, and it is from this perspective that I provide commentary on these class sessions. Scholarship within Multicultural Education on gender inequality has been helpful in exploring identity and difference in education, there are ways in which their impact has waned. Particularly in relation to issues of gender, this model of understanding education has become less and less supported. With the influx of research on boys’ educational achievement that has surfaced seemingly as a backlash to the efforts to “level the playing field” for girls in schools, as well as the overt resistance of many women teacher educators related to issues of sexism and educational inequality related to gender, multicultural educators be diligent about continuing to emphasize the relationship between gender and education today. There has been consistent 11 scholarship done within multicultural education that explores gender through liberal feminist lenses. As a result, continued in-depth work that examines gender bias and discrimination could further extend discussions of gender and education. Liberal Feminism focuses on issues of equality, equal treatment and equal rights between men and women. Through this lens, women are seen as no different from men with the exception of the reproductive differences inherent to each sex. Women’s rights and access to equal opportunities and society have been fought for and achieved by people supporting Liberal Feminism. Discrimination against women in sectors including education, employment, and politics are some of the main issues that have been combated by Liberal Feminism. Particular to education, there has been much attention paid to whether or not boys and girls are treated equally and afforded the same opportunities to succeed within and beyond the classroom. One of the most groundbreaking pieces of writing from the liberal feminist perspective was Mary Wollstonecraft’s, “Vindication of the Rights of Woman” (1792). A response to the political rhetoric of the time, Wollstonecraft argued for the political and economic freedom of women, that women have their own personhood. Not until 100 years later did others pick up these ideas of gender justice by adding onto her ideas the notion of equal civil liberties for women. In 1963, these concepts were again posited through the perspective of the suburban housewife in Betty Friedan’s, “The Feminine Mystique.” Here Friedan argued for women to participate beyond the private sphere, that women could be both wife and mother as well as pursue a career. Today, liberal feminist views still pervade the discourse of gender equality. The focus remains in large part on the structural impediments to women’s integration and full participation in all of society’s spheres (Tong, 1989). 12 Studies have been done on issues such as the participation of girls and boys in classroom discussions, the academic achievement gap between girls and boys, the amount and quality of attention that teachers give to students in relation to gender, issues of sexual harassment in schools, and the language that teachers use to refer to boy and girl students in their classes (AAUW, 1992; Sadker & Sadker, 1980). Stories of gender bias and discrimination against girls in schooling have emerged through this theoretical lens. Within the context of Teacher Education, these themes also apply. By looking at the interaction between the instructor and the students as well as the content of courses taught to teacher candidates related to gender bias and discrimination, liberal feminist storylines are crafted. Gender bias and discrimination studies within teacher education. The group of studies that examine on gender bias and discrimination describe the ways teacher preparation programs address, or more accurately don’t address, issues of gender. These studies can be grouped into three predominant areas of focus: curriculum, implications for teacher education, and teacher educator perspectives. Curriculum. Two studies have been conducted regarding gender bias in teacher education textbooks. Zittleman and Sadker (2002, 2003) conducted a study that analyzed teacher education texts for gender bias. They found that the texts they focused on included only about three percent of their content on gender. Further, their results indicated that the content that does highlight gender is often inaccurate or unclear. The authors discuss how the inclusion of content related to gender has increased since a similar study conducted by Sadker and Sadker in 1980. Mader and King (1995) surveyed administrators and faculty at teacher preparation programs in Michigan to understand the incorporation of gender issues – both gender equity 13 instruction and inclusion of feminist theories. They found that gender related instruction is lacking overall. The authors discuss the implications of the lack of inclusion of gender content in spite of studies like Sadker and Sadker’s (1980) of teacher education texts. Implications for teacher education. Several articles have been written that cite the importance of including gender issues into teacher preparation programs. Sanders (1997) gives an overview of scholarship on gender equity and teacher education. Citing all of the studies that have been done to illuminate issues of gender equity in K-12 education, including gender differences in teacher expectations, curriculum assessment, harassment, and administrative modeling, the author states that teacher education is a final step that is beginning to be taken. Pearson and Rooke (1993) argue for mainstreaming gender studies into teacher education programs. The authors note that gender and women’s studies programs have grown considerably in recent years, but in large part still have not influenced the field of education. Pearson and Rooke state that incorporating gender into teacher education would not only align with, but also promote the goals of educating future teachers. These goals include developing the traits of open-mindedness and sensitivity, maintaining an inclusive liberal arts curriculum, pedagogy, and theoretical perspective. Sadker, Sadker and Klein (1991) conducted a review of research called, “The Issue of Gender in Elementary and Secondary Education.” In this piece, the authors lay out the major works of scholarship completed over decades related to gender and K-12 education. In it, they also discuss the implications for Teacher Education. They conclude that gender is rarely, if ever, included in the curriculum of teacher preparation courses, despite the large number of studies that have documented gender discrimination, bias, and disparities in academic achievement. 14 Jones (1989) examined the influence of gender bias on teacher-student interactions with physical science and chemistry teachers. Results indicated significant bias in the amount and type of interaction teachers had with students related to gender. Implications for teacher education were discussed, and it was suggested that increased inclusion of gender related topics in preservice teacher preparation would reduce the amount of gender bias for these students as future teachers. Teacher educator perspectives. Few studies have been conducted within teacher education programs to assess gender bias and discrimination within that context. Poole and Isaacs (1993) discuss the perspectives of academic staff at an institute of higher education related to gender equity, gender issues in education, and the importance of incorporating gender into the curriculum. The results of their study indicate that teaching in an institution of higher education can maintain and reproduce existing gender inequalities in education. Further, they found that messages about gender issues received by teacher education students are often complex and contradictory in nature. Womanism First articulated by Alice Walker, Womanism is a feminist theoretical perspective that articulates the standpoint of African American women. As a critical response to what has been perceived as mainstream feminism and women’s standpoints that present the interests and experiences largely of white women of the middle class, Womanism centers cultural feminist approaches on the lived experiences of black women. As such, issues of race, class, and gender are inextricably linked. Through this perspective, teaching and learning are viewed as enacted in relation to the multiplicity of identities and experiences related to race, gender, and class. This perspective compels us to examine gender differences as interconnected with other group 15 identities and historical contexts. It becomes impossible through a womanist lens to think about gender identities in isolation from racial and social class identities and positionalities. As a result, conceptions of gender and education as presented within Multicultural Education as a field could be more complex and more accurately reflect experiences of women and girls by also considering the influences of race and class in their lives within and beyond the classroom. Womanism is a theoretical lens based on the lived experiences of African American women (Walker, 1990). It represents a critical response to mainstream feminism and women’s standpoints that present the interests and experiences largely of white women of the middle class. Womanism is related to, but yet distinct from, black feminist theory (Hill-Collins, 1990; hooks, 1989). Through these perspectives, issues of race, class, and gender are inextricably linked. The focus then becomes ending forms of oppression (racism, sexism and classism), as opposed to seeking gender, race, or class equality. It is debated whether or not Womanism is a type of feminism, if Womanism is interchangeable with black feminism, or if Womanism is a different type of theorizing altogether (Phillips, 2006). For the purposes of this study, I challenge the words of Patricia Hill-Collins in her article entitled, “What's in a name? Womanism, black feminism, and beyond” (1996). In this essay she talks about the need for black women to grapple with the aspects of Womanism and black feminism, as well as other perspectives that privilege the standpoint of black women, to come to a more unified vision. Although I see the import of unity, I value the complexities and nuances of the womanist perspective as distinct from black feminism. Phillips (2006) describes five overarching characteristics of Womanism: (1) it is antioppressionist, (2) it is vernacular, (3) it is nonideological, (4) it is communitarian, and (5) it is spiritualized. Therefore, it is along these 16 lines that I will employ Womanism as a perspective that is both related to and distinct from feminist theories. Through this perspective, teaching and learning are viewed as enacted in relation to the multiplicity of identities and experiences related to race, gender, and class (as well as other characteristics of identity). This perspective compels us to examine gender differences as interconnected with other group identities and historical contexts. It becomes impossible through a womanist lens to think about gender identities in isolation from racial and social class identities and positionalities. As a result, conceptions of gender and education as presented within Multicultural Education as a field could more complexly reflect experiences of women and girls by also considering the influences of race and class in their lives within and beyond the classroom. But this is only the beginning. “Womanist methods of social transformation cohere around the activities of harmonizing and coordinating, balancing, and healing . . . [through] dialogue, arbitration and mediation, spiritual activities, hospitality, mutual aid and self-help, and ‘mothering’” (Phillips, 2006, p. xxvi). Working through and beyond the experiences of working class African American women, Womanism stresses the uniquely cultural aspects of gender, class, and race, as well as their interconnections. “In contrast to established ideological perspectives like feminism, ethnic nationalism, Marxism/socialism, and so on, womanist activism does not focus on the confrontation of institutional structures so much as on the shaping of thought processes and relationships” (Phillips, 2006, p. xxx). As such, within the context of education, womanist perspectives would also focus on relationships and thought processes related to the intersections of gender, class, and race. Understanding the ways that people are situated within identities and social groups impacted by class, gender, and race come to the forefront with the womanist lens. Within 17 Teacher Education, examining the course content as well as the interactions between the instructor and the students for emphasis on the lived experiences of people related to multiple identities (including but not limited to gender, race, and class) constructs the womanist storyline. Gender as one of multiple aspects of identity studies within teacher education. Following in the line of many Multicultural Education theorists and practitioners, gender is also seen within Teacher Education research as one of multiple aspects of identity and diversity that need to be addressed by teachers, and thus teacher educators. There is fairly prolific writing within Multicultural Education (Nieto, Sleeter & Grant, Banks, Ladson-Billings, Gay, Gollnick, Noel, etc.) in this vein and so it was surprising to me that I have only come across a couple studies within Teacher Education that address gender in this way. This section of literature most closely relates to the theoretical perspective of Womanism. Although there are distinct differences that can be drawn, related to the discussion of the difference between Black Feminism and Womanism above, I will include this literature because it is the literature that most closely resembles an application of a Womanist perspective given very little has been written specifically employing this theoretical lens within educational research. In the article “Made in the (Multicultural) U.S.A.: Unpacking Tensions of Race, Culture, Gender, and Sexuality in Education,” Asher (2007) discusses the importance of looking at teacher education students’ multiple identities. Focusing specifically on representations of Asian Americans and differences of sexuality, the author urges teacher educators to reevaluate their incorporation, or lack thereof, of students’ critical and reflective analyses of multiple identities. Asher advocates for a multicultural pedagogy that “engages the intersecting tensions of race, culture, gender, and sexuality in critical, dialogical, and self-reflective ways” (71). 18 In “The Intersections of Race, Class, and Gender in the Teacher Preparation of an African American Social Justice Educator,” Knight (2002) conducted a case study of a working class African American female preservice teacher. Combining past research on African American teacher education and multicultural feminist literature, Knight explores the intersection of race, class, and gender within multicultural social reconstructionist teacher education. Curricular and pedagogical implications are discussed, particularly related to the concept of the intersectionality of race, gender, and class. Postmodern Feminism Postmodern Feminism affords us the ability to look beyond binary systems of identity and difference and to explore the ways power, knowledge and meaning are flexible and coconstructed within particular locations. Understanding gender and other social categories/differences through postmodern feminist lenses allow for complex and contradictory understandings. Identities are thus positionalities – differences based on situation, language, and performance. Gender, then, can be understood as more than the simple “boy” and “girl” storylines prominently featured within Multicultural Education literature. Gender can instead be explored in connection with other salient aspects of identity and positionality. It can be seen as dynamic and necessarily context-specific. Also, gender can be seen as a verb instead of a noun – to ‘do gender’ as opposed to ‘being’ a gender. Postmodern Feminism interrogates binary systems of identity and difference by exploring the ways in which power, knowledge and meaning are flexible and co-constructed within particular locations. Postmodern feminist lenses allow for complex and contradictory understandings of identity characteristics by highlighting the performative constructions of social categories by and between individuals within interactions. Identities are thus ever-shifting 19 positionalities – differences based on situation, language, and performance (Butler, 1999). Gender, then, can be analyzed through more than the simple “boy” and “girl” storylines prominently featured within Multicultural Education literature (Thorne, 1997). Gender can additionally and necessarily be explored in connection with other salient aspects of identity and positionality. Through postmodern feminist perspectives, gender can also be seen as a verb instead of a noun – to ‘do gender’ as opposed to ‘being’ a gender (West and Zimmerman, 1987). This process of ‘doing’ is often associated with the concept of gender performances that are dynamic and context-specific. Judith Butler is one of the most prominent feminist theorists to challenge the use of “women” or “woman” to connote a common or unified identity. Butler critiques theories and feminists who do not recognize that, “[r]ather than a stable signifier that commands the assent of those whom it purports to describe and represent, women . . . has become a troublesome term, a site of contest, a cause for anxiety” (Butler, 1999, p. 6). From a postmodern/poststructural framework, Butler challenges feminists to see gender as “performed” and “constructed” through multiple interactions as opposed to a label or category of people. She poses that, “[i]f there is something right in Beauvoir’s claim that one is not born, but rather becomes a woman, it follows that woman itself is a term in process, a becoming, a constructing that cannot rightfully be said to originate or to end” (p. 43). Research that has been conducted examining the construction of gender in schools is limited. One of the most influential and well-known studies was conducted by Barrie Thorne and is central to her (1997) book Gender Play: Girls and Boys in School. Thorne cited West and Zimmerman’s (1987) notion of “doing gender” to support her understanding of gender as socially constructed. She states that, “[t]he social construction of gender is an active and ongoing 20 process” (4). Thorne recognizes students as social actors who create gender structures and meanings through their interactions within classrooms, on playgrounds, as well as in multiple other school spaces. In addition to examining and understanding gender as enacted and produced by students with each other, Thorne also studied the role school staff members play in these processes. Recognizing the authority of teachers and school staff members, Thorne urges us not to overlook the ways in which practices such as gender segregation for competition, both within and beyond the classroom, structures meanings of gender for students. However, the enactment of gender practices and policies by school staff members should not also overshadow the very important roles that students play in the gender construction process with or without the intervention of teachers or other school staff members. Both Thorne and Butler would agree that there is more to gender than the dichotomous and static individual identities of boy/girl and woman/man. These identities, or labels, are reinforced and resisted, played out and interrogated, questioned and unquestioned by individuals and groups within many social contexts, including schools. What would this look like in a classroom context? This theoretical perspective is much more difficult to operationalize. I have not found any studies that articulate how one might look at gender through the lens of Postmodern Feminism related to teaching and learning. As a result, I am drawing from my own understandings of the theoretical lens as well as my own experiences, both lived and theoretical, within and beyond the classroom setting. To me, Postmodern Feminism within education would be comprised of multiple, perhaps contradictory, interpretations of the dynamics related to gender and power. Also, Postmodern Feminism interrogates experience as foundational knowledge (Scott, 1992). Both of these then require constant and critical interrogations of the definitions and performances of gender in relation to 21 power. Contexts and the multiplicity of identities are also called into question as contributors to the constructions of meanings and knowledge related to gender (Wallin, 2001). Specific to the context of Teacher Education, it would be important to examine instances where binaries are challenged related to gender and notions of gender performance are integrated. Analyzing the curriculum and the interactions between the instructor and the students related to these, as well as other examples of the complexity and situatedness of gender, would comprise the postmodern feminist storyline of this study. Gendered power relations studies within teacher education. The category of literature that aligns with the postmodern feminist theoretical perspective I have called “Gendered Power Relations” because the writings that I have come across in this section have incorporated a view of gender that is contextual, relational, and/or positional. Ellis (1993) wrote an interpretive account of gender through her personal reflections, analysis of her experiences as a teacher educator and an educational researcher, and psychoanalytic and poststructural theoretical perspectives. After reviewing her analysis of issues related to the symbolic work of becoming boys and girls, the significance of physicality, and the topics of aggressiveness, assertiveness, emotions, and morality, the author discusses some strategies for incorporating gender issues into teacher education. Hollingsworth (1995) discusses the importance of including gender within teacher education programs. After reviewing potential hypotheses for the lack of inclusion of gender issues, and discussing different feminist frameworks for understanding and presenting issues of gender within teacher preparation, the author concludes that exploring with teacher education students their own genders and positions hold the most promise. Hollingsworth advocates for teacher educators to use feminist scholarship to help their students think critically about their 22 own life experiences related to gender, teaching, and learning. Baker and Richardson (2005) describe a gender and education course offered to teacher education students in South Africa. In this course, narrative inquiry is used to get students to examine their own gender identities and masculine and feminine subject positionings. Three Distinct Yet Overlapping Perspectives The beauty of these three theoretical perspectives, as is the case with theories and their application more generally, is that there are both commonalities and differences among and between them. The most obvious commonality among these three perspectives is their interest and emphasis on issues of gender. All three perspectives center their discourse and activity on how and where gender is being addressed within education and beyond. The distinctions between these perspectives come in how the issues of gender, context, oppression and other concepts are approached and discussed. The womanist theoretical perspective places a primary emphasis on the lived experiences of people and their multiple identity characteristics including, but not limited to, race, class, and gender. The liberal feminist perspective focuses on the topic of gender inequality and views issues of gender related to bias and discrimination that exists within schools and broader society. And, Postmodern Feminism challenges the concept of gender altogether as performed within interactions and contexts of power relations that then produce, maintain and contradict discourses of gender within education and beyond. Method(s)/(ologies) Situating My Study It is clear that research on gender in teacher education has much room to grow. Although important and valuable work has been done, including the studies referenced above, this small section of literature review sends a strong message in and of itself that there is much more work 23 to be done. My study aims to add to, as well as to deepen, the scholarship on gender in teacher education. It is my hope that in combining the three types of research named above (gender bias and discrimination, gender as one of multiple aspects of identity, and gendered power relations), that educational researchers will also be challenged and inspired to examine the multiple ways that gender can be examined within the contexts of education, multicultural education, and teacher education. It is through the combination of multiple theoretical perspectives, as well as the interplay between them, that we can understand more about what happens for students and teachers within classrooms related to gender both implicitly and explicitly. As you read on, you will become more familiar with the three lenses I include as the theoretical framework of my study – Liberal Feminism, Womanism, and Postmodern Feminism – as well as the three categories of scholarship that align with these perspectives – gender bias and discrimination, gender as one of multiple aspects of identity, and gendered power relations. I apply these three perspectives in the analysis of my data to construct three (overlapping and contradictory) stories about gender and teacher education. In my study I seek to understand better how multiple lenses might enable more nuanced understandings of gender that multicultural education, and by extension multicultural teacher education, could benefit from. In answering the question, “What was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course?” I set out to explore ways that the teaching of gender within this course be understood through the three theoretical frames – Liberal Feminism, Womanism, and Postmodern Feminism. Because I am seeking to understand and articulate multiple stories related to gender and education within the context of multicultural teacher education, this study is methodologically framed through feminist poststructuralism. Specific research goals that stem from this approach include: a focus on issues of gender, an examination of the multiplicity of 24 gendered identities/positionalities, an exploration of the complexities, contradictions, and contexts of identities and positionalities, and a consideration of my own subjectivities as a researcher. Feminist Poststructuralism Although the coherence of both feminism and poststructuralism are debated, there are several themes that consistently emerge within feminist poststructural epistemologies and methodologies, these include: power and knowledge, language and discourse, and subjectivity. Power and knowledge. Referring to Foucault’s writing, St. Pierre applies the notion of “power relations” to poststructural feminism in education (2000). As such, power is not something that can be held by anyone or any institution universally. All people, events, and interactions exist within relations of power. Therefore, unlike Marxist views of difference, privilege, and oppression these concepts are seen as contextually and historically situated, and that individuals within societies maintain possibilities for resistance. Applied specifically to feminism, poststructural conceptions of power relations enable multiple views of, as well as historical and discursively positioned, women’s experiences. As a result, notions of knowledge construction and truth are also implicated within power relations. Knowledge therefore is discursively created within relations of power and meanings derived both multiple and contradictory. “All categories of knowledge are historical and social constructions and connected to issues of power since knowledge has always been used both to communicate and to control” (St. Pierre, 1997, p. 18). Therefore, it is important within the realm of educational research to look for multiple, contextualized ways of understanding and explaining any text, interaction, or pedagogy. Within my study, I incorporate feminist poststructural notions of power and knowledge both epistemologically and methodologically by 25 examining the ways these concepts are constructed and situated within the classroom events I analyze as well as within my process of analysis. Language and discourse. “Within poststructuralist theory, language is understood as the most powerful constitutive force shaping what we understand as possible and what we desire within those possibilities” (Davies, 2000, p. 181). Through language meaning is made within the context of relations between people and words. As a result, within feminist poststructuralism, language and its deployment creates the reality within which we exist (Weedon, 1997). What is said about gender within teacher education courses, and how, is therefore of the utmost importance in a study like the one I am conducting. Further, through language the concept of discourse is developed. Weedon cites Foucault’s concept of a “discursive field” by describing them as competing ways of understanding and giving meaning to social institutions, interactions, and events (1997). “Through a concept of discourse, which is seen as a structuring principle of society, in social institutions, modes of thought and individual subjectivity, feminist poststructuralism is able, in detailed, historically specific analysis, to explain the working of power on behalf of specific interests and to analyse the opportunities for resistance to it” (Weedon, 1997, p. 40). Examining the ways discourses related to gender and education are incorporated into teacher preparation, within and/or against the typical narratives about gender bias and discrimination, are a key part of my study. In particular, in choosing to question, play with and juxtapose what is taught about gender through three distinct, yet interconnected, theoretical perspectives employs the notion of coexisting discursive fields. 26 Subjectivity. All that is cannot be understood apart from the discourses, relations of power, and understandings of knowledge (Weedon, 1997). Further, “by assuming people to be effects of language, knowledge, power and history, rather than their essential authors, a more provisional, historical, and ethical understanding of agency is possible” (Britzman, 2000, 36). In doing so, the “myth of the unitary person” (Davies, 1989) is challenged. Instead, subjects are viewed as varied “possible selves located in different storylines. Like history, the person is disjointed until and unless located in a story. Since many stories can be told even of the same event, then we have many possible coherent selves” (Davies, 1989, p. 229). In my own research, I employ these notions of subjectivity both with my participants and with myself as the researcher by examining the contextual and situational relationships and circumstances that produce and reproduce ways of being. It is my intention to continually hold open possibilities for conflicting and complex understandings of subjectivity. Feminist Poststructural Methodology Within research, feminist poststructuralism can take many forms. Lather (1992) discusses that postpositivist feminist poststructural research often “probes issues of the power relations between researcher/researched, objectivity/subjectivity, and found versus constructed worlds” (p. 93). Particular methodological aims that I have discerned from feminist poststructuralism include: a focus on gender, multiplicity of voices and stories, participant involvement in the analysis of data, and researcher subjectivity. Focus on gender. Inherent to all research designated as feminist, there is a primary focus on gender within my study. Looking at what is taught about gender within this multicultural teacher education 27 course, and by extension the ways gender is co-constructed by the instructor, the students, and the content and context of the course within which my study is located aligns well with this feminist poststructural aim. Gender is one of the primary foci of this research and the overarching purpose of this research is to add insight and to trouble current conceptions of gender within education, teacher education, and multicultural education, at the very least. Multiplicity of voice and stories. Due to the focus on issues of power, knowledge, language and discourse, feminist poststructuralism is methodologically concerned with the multiple ways that meaning can be made through the collection of data, the analysis of data, and the writing of research. Because my study both employs multiple theoretical lenses as well as involves the participation of the instructor as a research participant (discussed in more detail below), it aligns well with feminist poststructuralism methodologically. Welcoming and seeking out multiple harmonizing and juxtaposed stories of events, interactions and contexts becomes the center of this piece of research as a result. Participant involvement. Engaging research participants in the collection and analysis of data, as well as the writing of research, is a common practice within feminist poststructuralism. Technically speaking, I interviewed the instructor of the multicultural teacher education course within which this study is situated. I also asked her to respond to my analyses and writing of the class sessions focusing on gender. These practices align well with feminist poststructural methodologies. However, to see my relationship with the instructor of the course as merely about participant involvement would be a grave understatement. I have spent many years partnering in research and teaching endeavors with the professor who ultimately invited me into her classroom to 28 conduct my dissertation research. I have a deep respect and admiration for who she is as a person, an educator and an educational researcher. It has been my honor to work side-by-side with her, and it is in this vein that I humbly and reverently employ feminist poststructural methodology within this current educational research partnership. Researcher subjectivity. Making sure that the researcher is not intended to be, because they never really can be, exempt from examination in relation to the goals, processes, and outcomes of research, is a major claim of feminist poststructuralism. Described in more detail below, (Interrogating Researcher Subjectivities) and begun with “My (Partial) Story” at the beginning of this document, I place a strong emphasis on exploring the ways my own subjectivities play into my study. This research would not exist outside of my own subjectivities as a researcher, as a person, as a scholar, as an activist, as an educator, as well as the countless other subjectivities I embody and express moment-by-moment. My background in the field of Women’s Studies, my experience in teaching a course like this, my lived experiences as a woman, and so much more inevitably factor into what I see, or do not see, within the texts of this research. That is why I feel it is extremely important to own and be transparent about who I am as well as the impacts, potential and real, on this piece of research, for better or worse. Data Collection To help me make sense of what was taught about gender within this multicultural education course, I generated the following forms of data: Videotaping. I gathered videotape data during the class sessions in which gender was explicitly covered in the content of the course: October 14th and October 16th, 2008. On these days, I set 29 up multiple video cameras (7) to capture various angles of the room so that I could see all of the students and the instructor throughout the entirety of the class period (see figure 1 below). The video cameras were stationary so that I was able to pay attention to the happenings within the class and take field notes of my observations. Figure 1: Position of Participants and Video Cameras in the Classroom (Instructor) Field notes. I took notes on what I observed and my initial questions stemming from those observations related to the three theoretical lenses, as well as the ways that I saw my own subjectivities with this project coming into play. I divided my field notes into two columns, one for observations of what was happening, and another for questions I had, connections I saw to the theoretical frames, and things I wanted to think more about or look into further. Course artifacts. There were four primary artifacts of the course that I looked at: the course syllabus, the instructor’s lesson plans for the days focused on gender, the assigned readings related to gender, and the online questions posed as prompts for student responses on the days gender is discussed. 30 I collected these artifacts to analyze as a part of the explicit teaching of gender as well as to build the context of gender within the course overall. Student coursework. I intended to look at two written assignments completed by students: the cultural autobiography and the online postings on the days that gender is specifically discussed. The cultural autobiography was assigned to students in two parts, one that was completed at the beginning of the semester (September 9th) and one that was completed toward the end of the semester (November 25th). In this assignment students were asked to discuss how certain aspects of their identity impacted their schooling experiences, and also impacted by their schooling experiences. Students chose the aspects of identity they feel are salient to them to write about. I intended to review these papers (both versions) to examine the ways gender is discussed, or not, by the students in relation to my theoretical framework. For the online posting assignment, three students were chosen by the instructor each class period to respond to a set of questions about the following class’s readings. Three more students were chosen each day to respond about the discussion of that day’s class content and readings. I intended to review the postings made by students on the days where gender was the focus of discussion (October 14th and 16th) to look at what was discussed and how. In the end, I decided not to include these data sources in my analysis. Given the scope of my research, it became clear to me that looking at these assignments was really not appropriate for my research question. Because I was exploring what was taught about gender and not at what was learned, I abandoned this data source early on in my analysis. As I consider expanding or continuing my educational research agenda, I definitely would love to revisit this data for expanded and extended analysis. 31 Interviews. I conducted an initial interview with the instructor early on within the fall semester of 2008. Within this interview I gathered information about the instructor’s identity as well as her outlook on teaching about gender within the course and her understandings about gender more broadly. Following this more formal first interview, I followed up with the instructor to discuss with her some of my analyses of the data collected in a series of interviews that supported the crafting and construction of the stories you find here. As I mentioned earlier, however, referring only to interviews cannot really capture nature of the relationship and interactions between the instructor of the course and I. We spent time speaking with each other in person, over the phone and by email about the concepts and content of the dissertation throughout the period of data analysis. And, she participated in reading and editing parts of the analysis throughout my processes and stages of writing. For this, I am so very grateful. Data Analysis Interview, classroom video and field note data analysis involved multiple stages and levels of coding, all of which were be based on Strauss & Corbin's (1998) procedures for open coding and method of constant comparison. This method was applied for video analysis as well, and also followed procedures for video analysis and transcription adapted from Erickson (2006). I also developed coding schemes on those aspects of gender which seem to be particularly relevant to each of the theoretical perspectives, including instances of gender bias (Liberal Feminism), situations where race and class are integrated into the discussion of gender (Womanism), and ways gender performance was demonstrated (Postmodern Feminism). Additionally, I utilized discourse analysis methods to understand how meanings were negotiated among and between the instructor and the students (Cazden, 2001). I examined ongoing how the 32 students and teacher talked to each other, noting how the language teacher candidates used positioned themselves and each other in relation to gender issues and identities. Operationalizing the research question. The following table elaborates on the ways that I operationalized the research question, “What was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course?” In order to operationalize this research question, I went to the three theoretical lenses I was utilizing to ask more specific and detailed questions pertaining to each lens. By identifying questions that would guide my viewing of the class sessions through the liberal feminist, womanist, and postmodern feminist lenses, I was better able to discern what it was I was looking for/at in my viewings of the videotape data. Along with these organizing ideas, I also determined how I would be able to recognize them, where I would look, and what I would potentially see (see Table 1: Operationalizing the Research Question). For each theoretical perspective, I generated a driving question or organizing idea. The driving question for the Liberal Feminist lens was, “How is gender bias taught?” The driving question for the Womanist lens was, “How are the concepts of race, class and gender taught through the use of narratives?” And, the organizing idea for the Postmodern Feminist lens was, “I want to craft a story of the complexity of the teaching of gendered performances.” The Postmodern Feminist perspective required an organizing idea instead of a driving question because the Postmodern Feminist lens is necessarily generative instead of descriptive (Tyler, 1986). Liberal Feminism, as stated earlier, focuses predominantly on the teaching of gender and education that highlights gender bias. Therefore, I found it appropriate for my focus question related to this lens to be, “How is gender bias taught?” Possible ways to recognize this in action 33 included, the inclusion of gender bias content in articles, classroom discussion, videos, online discussion prompts, etc., as well as the messages sent in the teaching of gender bias content, and teacher/student interaction related to gendered patterns of communication, etc. Womanism places its emphasis on the lived experiences of people related to the intersections of race, gender, and social class. As a result, I chose the question, “How are the concepts of race, class and gender taught through the use of narratives?” to guide my analysis through the womanist lens. Ways to identify this lens in my analysis included, the inclusion of narratives/anecdotes within readings, videos, classroom discussion, etc., the instructor’s use of personal narratives/anecdotes in instruction, and classroom activities/discussions that value students’ sharing of their own narratives. The complexities of gendered performances, and their situatedness within relations of power, are questioned by the postmodern feminist lens. Because this lens is a generative lens instead of an interpretive lens, there is not a guiding question for this lens. In employing this lens, it is my hope to evoke complex and troubled understandings of what was taught about gender and education on the two days where gender was the specified content area. Therefore, “I want to craft a story of the complexity of the teaching of gendered performances” is the statement that I have created to challenge me in raising questions related to my application of a postmodern feminist lens. Places where this could be interrogated and problematized included, examining the multiple ways the instructor/students perform gender, questioning the multiple ways the instructor/student evoke gender in contradictory ways (their own or others’) – being a gender juxtaposed with doing gender, and the complexification of the multiple ways the instructor/students could resist/open doors to resist existing gender structures. 34 Table 1: Operationalizing the Research Question Theoretical perspective Liberal Feminism Driving question or organizing idea How is gender bias taught? Operationalized/ways to recognize it Womanism How are the concepts of race, class and gender taught through the use of narratives? • Inclusion of narratives/anecdotes within readings, videos, classroom discussion, etc. • Instructor’s use of personal narratives/anecdotes in instruction • Classroom activities/discussions that value students’ sharing of their own narratives Postmodern Feminism I want to craft a story of the complexity of the teaching of gendered performances. • The multiple ways the course content and context highlighted gender performance • The multiple ways the instructor/students evoke gender in contradictory ways (their own or others’) – being a gender juxtaposed with doing gender • The multiple ways the instructor/students resist/open doors to resist existing gender structures • Inclusion of gender bias content in articles, classroom discussion, videos, online discussion prompts, etc. • Messages sent in the teaching of gender bias content (don’t do it!) • Teacher/student interaction related to gendered patterns of communication, etc. As a result, I viewed and analyzed the video tapes, my field notes, the course artifacts, and interview data through the three theoretical lenses identified in my theoretical framework – liberal feminist, womanist, and postmodern feminist – by answering and addressing the driving questions and organizing idea that accompanied each theoretical perspective. 35 Locations of analysis. As I explored the ideas and concepts of what was taught about gender through the three lenses, it became clear to me that a pattern of where I was looking began to emerge. As I asked the questions associated with each lens, there were three places that I sought to answer them. The three places are commonly known within education: the teacher, the students, and the content. These three locations are interconnected and yet allow distinct interpretations of the teaching of gender. To expand and deconstruct the territory of these locations, I have used them in my study in a unique way. I have chosen to employ the three locations in ways that evoke the active nature of interaction. As a result, I am working with the location of teacher by exploring “teacher moves” including teacher/student interaction, time spent on which activities (as related to/differing from agenda), and the location of the teacher. For the location of student, I am exploring “student moves” including student questions and comments, raised hands, posture, and the location of the students. Lastly, for the location of course content, I interrogate the curriculum that includes the assigned readings, the syllabus, the class session agendas, the Angel online writing prompts, and the in-class activities and videos. I’ve included the following table (Table 2: Locations of Analysis) for easy reference to the locations of analysis. Table 2: Locations of Analysis Teacher Moves Student Moves • • • • • • • • Language of the teacher Teacher/student interaction Posture/embodiment Location of the teacher Time spent on which activities (as related to/differing from agenda) Language of the students Posture/embodiment (including raised hands) Student/student interaction 36 Table 2 (cont’d) Course Content • • • • • • • Student/teacher interaction (including questions/comments) Location of the students Assigned Readings Class session agendas In-class activities and videos Syllabus Angel writing prompts Interrogating researcher subjectivities. Ongoing, I have interrogated my own subjectivities working on this project. Researcher standpoint is always a factor within any research endeavor. In particular, there are several ways in which my own identities and positionalities play into this study. As a former instructor of a course much like the one in which I collected my research (teaching many sections of the course over 6 years) I have extensive experience with the content and pedagogy of the course. However, I have never taught a section of the course focused on urban contexts. Also, I have extensive experience thinking about and advocating for the inclusion of gender issues (as well as other issues less related to this study such as race, ability, and sexual orientation) within the curriculum and pedagogy of the course. It is my hope that by situating my study within a section of the course focused on urban education I have introduced an amount of critical distance from my own experiences as an instructor of the course. As a result of all of these factors, I have spent quite a bit of time exploring how my roles as an observer and participant, my identities/positionalities, and methodologies impact the collection of data and the stories I construct. Ethical considerations. Ultimately, we have to learn to make political and ethical choices. These choices always entail risks – risks clarified by postmodern, postcolonial theories. We risk misrepresenting others (it is not a question of whether, but how much), we risk 37 speaking for those who do not wish to be spoken for, and we risk speaking in voices that silence others. All this despite our best intentions. (Kirsh, 1999, 63) The issue of ethics in research is unavoidable. Given that representation and voice are inherently complex issues, it is of the utmost importance to take careful measures to ensure, to the best of ones ability, ethical treatment of participants. The most effective way of doing this is by attaining informed consent. All of the participants in my study received information about the study and were given the option to sign a form consenting to one or several parts of my study, including videotaping, review of coursework, review of course artifacts, and individual interviews. Trustworthiness. Creswell (1998) discusses eight “verification procedures” for a researcher to address trustworthiness within a qualitative research endeavor. They are: prolonged engagement and persistent observation in the field, triangulation, peer review, negative case analysis, clarifying researcher bias, member checks, external audits, and rich, thick description. Below I will discuss the ways in which my study meets these eight criteria. Prolonged engagement and persistent observation in the field. I spent an entire semester in the course where my study is situated. I observed and conducted videotaping in all class sessions (with the exception of class sessions that were combined with another section the course because I did not have consent to tape with that instructor and those students). Triangulation. I use multiple data sources, including: observation, videotaping, interviews, examination of course artifacts, and field notes. At each stage of the analysis and writing of this dissertation, I referred to these multiple sources of data. As you read on, you will see the major role that the 38 videotapes of the class sessions provided me with the opportunity to transcribe both audio and visual aspects of what happened in the class session. Together with my observations, the course artifacts and my field notes, I was able to reconstruct what happened in the classroom on the days that gender was the focal point. Above you can see the extent to which I partnered with the instructor through both formal and informal interviews that were crucial in the development of this study. As a result, I am confident in my ability to triangulate my data in this dissertation. Peer review. I worked with other students and peer scholars within and beyond my PhD program over the course of my data analysis and writing. I also had the opportunity to collaborate with teachers at the K-12 level to discuss my research and findings. Through these interactions, I meet the criteria of peer review. Negative case analysis. Throughout my study I have been open to interpretations that both confirm and disconfirm my working hypotheses. Employing feminist poststructuralism also compels me to maintain conflicting interpretations of data in the stories that I tell. Clarifying researcher bias. Because of my research methodology, I have constantly interrogated the ways that my own subjectivities as a researcher impact and construct my understandings, analyses, and writing throughout this dissertation process. Member checks. The instructor of the course has been involved throughout the data analysis portion of my study. As described in the interviews section of data collection, I conducted several formal and 39 informal interviews with the instructor, and partnered with her to construct several parts of the analysis. As a result, this is an engagement with member checking. External audits. An external audit is not necessarily feasible with this study given that it is a doctoral dissertation. However, the members for my dissertation committee, given their varied expertise and knowledge related to both the content and process of my study provide an alternate form of an external audit. Rich, thick description. Throughout my study, it is my intent to provide enough description for readers to interpret my findings within and beyond the context of educational research. Setting the Scene Specifically, the study is situated within the context of the Teacher Education program at a Research I institution located in the Midwest region of the United States. Teacher candidates at this university are required to take one course that resembles a multicultural teacher education course as it incorporates content related to social issues/identities and their relationship with schooling. It is therefore within the context of this course that my study begins. Within this course, I intend to analyze the ways the students, the instructor, and the content and context come together to construct stories of gender in teacher education. The study is situated within the context of the Teacher Education program at a Midwestern Research I institution renowned both nationally and internationally for nearly all of the programs offered within the College of Education, and takes particular pride in its teacher education program. For over ten years the elementary and secondary education programs have 40 been ranked at the top by national reports. As stated on the College of Education website, the teacher preparation program: Provides teacher candidates with opportunities to gain the critical knowledge and skills needed to teach children effectively, especially those children who come to school less well-prepared than others for what school traditionally offers. [This university]'s College of Education in collaboration with departments in eight other [university] colleges, provides a wide range of teacher education options. Students who choose to prepare for a career in education complete a baccalaureate degree in a disciplinary major plus teaching certification followed by a full year internship. Students preparing to teach at the elementary level have the option of selecting either a disciplinary major or a major in the College of Education with two disciplinary minors. Students may select from more than 20 major and close to 30 minor fields…The college also offers a Post-Baccalaureate program which leads to teacher certification and also provides opportunities for certified teachers to obtain additional endorsements and certificate renewals. A relatively new project within the department prepares teacher candidates specifically to enter urban contexts. As stated on the website for that program, the goal is: to prepare teachers to teach in the most challenging environments. We seek to ground the preparation and commitment of prospective urban teachers by providing early experiences with successful urban educators and guided field experiences with children, youth, and families in urban settings. Entering as university freshman, they take their initial Teacher Education courses together. One course these students, as well as all other TE students at this university, are required to take is the multicultural issues in education course. Beyond taking two common introductory courses together, students admitted into the urban focused teacher preparation program are also involved in additional programming related specifically to urban teacher preparation. After participating in the program for their first two years, students are automatically admitted into the teacher education program (a program that is otherwise highly selective and difficult to be admitted into). The required multicultural issues in education course, hereafter referred to as TE 201, most closely resembles a multicultural teacher education course as it incorporates content related 41 to social issues/identities and their relationship with schooling. According the course description, TE 201 is a “comparative study of schools and other social institutions with a focus on the social construction of diversity, maintenance of inequality, and political, social, and economic consequences for individuals and groups.” Instructors of this course are required to address the following sixteen competencies: the social construction of normality and difference, purposes of schooling, race, gender, sexual orientation, disability, special education, language, education and globalization, theories of academic success and failure, social class, social (im)mobility and social reproduction, forms of capital, tracking, school finance, and assessment. These competencies are to be addressed within the following four key themes: understanding identity and positionality, opportunity and systems of power and privilege, social, political, and historical contexts, and structural and organizational issues in schooling. When I conducted my research, there were 16 sections of TE 201 taught concurrently by graduate and faculty instructors within the College of Education. I conducted observation and videotaping within each class session within one section of TE 201 designated specifically for the students admitted into the urban education program. There were 26 students enrolled in this section taught by an Assistant Professor within the Department of Teacher Education. Participants Instructor. The instructor, an African American woman, was in her 4th year of teaching the course. She was also currently serving as the course coordinator overseeing all sections of the course as the faculty of record and coordinates all personnel and professional development processes for the course. I met her in my second year of teaching multicultural teacher education when she was hired as a new Assistant Professor in the university’s Department of Teacher Education. I had 42 always had quite a bit of respect for her as a woman, as a professor, and as a mentor. We spoke periodically as colleagues both personally and professionally. One summer, I supported her as a research assistant transcribing some of her audio interview data for a project she was working on exploring the experiences of high-achieving African American students in a nearby urban area. During the semester when I collected my data in her course, she was pregnant with her second daughter who was born during the very last week of the semester. Her first daughter was one year old at this time, and super cute if you ask me! At the beginning of the semester, Imani spoke a bit about herself to her students. She shared with them many aspects of her identity, her gender, her race, her sexual orientation (heterosexual), where she grew up (a southern city), where she went to college (a southern technical university) and where she earned her Master’s degree (a southern private university). One thing she did not share with them was that she received her EdD at an Ivy League institution. She simply mentioned that she spent about 10 years in a northeastern city prior to coming to work at this Midwestern Research I university. At another point early in the semester, Imani shared with her students that her name was a family name, and that she was the third Imani in her family. Students. The student population was far more racially diverse than many sections of TE 201 with over 50% of the students enrolled being African American. There were 5 men and 21 women in this section of the course. This population of men in the course was fairly typical in my experience teaching the course (about 20%). Because the course was a requirement within the urban education program, nearly all of the students in the course were in their first year at the university. These students and the students enrolled in the other urban education program section 43 of the course would take TE 201 together in the first semester of the year and then another introductory course on teaching and learning in the second semester. Playing with Gender(ed) Stories An analytic reading. As I began to ponder the presentation and production of this dissertation, I was particularly interested in presenting multiple stories, from multiple vantage points with multiple perspectives. As described above in “My (Partial) Story,” I have realized that multiple viewpoints are both valuable and necessary to understand the complexities and particularities of circumstances, experiences and interactions. Hence each individual perspective, or lens, is inherently partial. Partial both in that each viewpoint offers insight into part of what can be seen or understood, as well as partial as having a vested interest in it’s own view and the implications therein. This is why even my own stories and interpretations throughout this writing are partial (in both ways). In order to invoke and present multiple perspectives throughout my study I sought to format and organize even the writing of it in a way that would demonstrate this ideology. Writing a play-like piece of performance art emerged, to me, as the most appropriate and engaging way to present my study. Although it is an adaptation of what a play in literary traditions most often looks and feels like, the format and performativity afford this dissertation a creative space to demonstrate an innovative approach to qualitative research analysis, writing and utility. The play (1) answers the question, “What was taught about gender in this multicultural education course?” (2) demonstrates multiple ways of answering the question, and (3) allows readers to see/ascertain for themselves answers to the question. I see my research study as pushing the boundaries of qualitative research. In the pages that follow, I seek to 44 provide transparency and to set up the creative display of the qualitative data and analysis of this dissertation project contributing alongside other qualitative research that present findings more non-traditionally (Segall, 2002; Wolfe, 1992; Hollingsworth, 1994). Including the transcript of the class periods focused on gender is a writing move that I decided to make in order to increase transparency as well as complexity in my writing and analysis. So, as you read on, you will be reading what I observed and transcribed from a Multicultural Teacher Education course during the class sessions where gender was the primary focus of discussion. I have changed the names to protect the anonymity of the instructor and the students. You will see the transcript as the regular black text, both dialogue and descriptive information about I observed in person and in reviewing the videotapes of those days. All nonverbal information is offered in brackets stage direction appears in playwriting techniques. Stage direction is instruction to actors that is written into the script of a play that gives the actors additional insight into the movements, temperaments and interactions of the characters. It is important to note that the partiality of my inclusion of the stage direction is unavoidable. What I chose to include as stage direction within the transcript, as well as where and how was necessarily filtered through my subjective lenses as the researcher (Tyler, 1986). Beyond the transcript of the class sessions themselves, I have also written into the play additional characters that I created to comment on and interrogate the content of the transcript as it was happening. These characters give insight that provides additional context for readers to ponder. The characters themselves grew out of the methodological and ideological stance that all situations, circumstances and interactions are necessarily partial and can be seen and understood from various vantage points. Again, these characters necessarily speak from my understanding and interpretation of the three theoretical perspectives that they were created to represent. I am 45 not claiming that these characters are speaking truths from these theoretical stances, however, I am utilizing them to demonstrate how a multiplicity of voices and viewpoints can illuminate and interrogate the content, context and interactions within and beyond this classroom. Within the text of the play I have included comments to set up and to unpack each scene from my perspective as the researcher to demonstrate how this play as the center of my research performance can function as an analytic tool. You will see prior to and following each scene text in italics that would not be performed to guide readers of this dissertation project through the presentation of the data and analysis. These sections can also serve to guide facilitators of discussion about this play as a teaching tool, which will be discussed in further detail below. A teaching tool. In addition to being an analytic reading, this play has been written as a teaching tool for educators within the field of education. Specifically, this play has been designed to explore the ways that gender is taught within multicultural and urban teacher education contexts. However, the application of what is presented here reaches far beyond the particular subject of gender. In the training of teachers and the teaching of students from kindergarten (and even earlier) through college (and even beyond), it is imperative that we are continuously and rigorously examining what we teach, the ways that we teach, as well as the interactions between students, teachers, and that which is being taught. The play takes place within the context of a multicultural teacher education course with an urban education focus. Looking at what is taught about gender within this unique context can serve as a model for educators within and beyond classrooms to interrogate and expand our conceptions of what is being taught (implicitly, explicitly and by omission). As a result, this play can serve as a teaching tool within teacher education programs, within K-12 teacher and administrator professional development, and as an educational tool for 46 teacher educators, educational researchers and educational policy makers, to name a few relevant and related arenas and discourses. In this play, the theoretical perspectives of Liberal Feminism, Womanism, and Postmodern Feminism are employed to begin a journey that urges audiences to view and interpret the teaching of gender in more complex ways. By utilizing multiple theoretical lenses, we can deepen and broaden our understanding of what is taught, and thus become smarter, more effective, and ultimately more transformative educators. And, through the use of this theatrical approach, we can both stretch ourselves to apply creativity within our teaching, and have some fun in the process. Through these means, engagement in what is being taught increases and new pedagogical possibilities emerge for students and teachers alike. Additionally, seeing what happens within this course can provide audiences an opportunity to reflect on how the teaching of gender within teacher education, multicultural education and urban education can be explored and ultimately enhanced as we navigate the terrain of educating teachers and students within and beyond the classroom. The script of this play is based largely on the transcript of two class sessions of an actual multicultural/urban teacher education course. These two days of a semester-long course were focused specifically on the topic of gender. To protect the identities of the students and the instructor of the course, I have designated pseudonyms for use in this play. In addition to the dialogue and activities that occurred on those two class days, I have included additional lines and codes to elaborate, enhance and complicate the transcript and to further develop it into a script that enacts the analyses emerging through this dissertation project. I have added lines that incorporate what I am calling inner-monologues of the instructor. These inner-monologues appear in the script of the play highlighted in yellow. Within these 47 sections of the script, I have drawn from interviews and conversations with the instructor points that give additional insight into the positions, reflections and motivations of the instructor related to the content, structure and pedagogy of the course. The instructor has reviewed and collaborated with me to construct these inner-monologues. Also included at the conclusion of the play is an Epilogue that includes the instructor’s reflections on being involved in this research endeavor. This scene was also constructed it from the formal and informal dialogues between the instructor and I and she graciously and enthusiastically agreed to include it within the play. I have also included comments from myself as the researcher in the classroom. These commentaries appear in magenta text. There were times as I was reviewing the content of the transcript and there were pieces of information that felt missing that I was aware of because I had sat in on the sessions of the course the entire semester, as well as things that I knew because of being an instructor and graduate student coordinator of the course. As a result, I included these researcher commentaries in order to provide additional context specific to my knowledge of the course generally and my experiences with the instructor and students prior to the two class periods on gender. Another component of the tran/script that I constructed was the stage direction. This is the part of a play where the playwright describes the movement of the characters and additional subtleties that are not present in the lines alone. Examples include where the person is standing, how they are standing, who a speaker is looking at while speaking, and other activity (or lack thereof) that is going on during before, during or after a character’s lines. I did my very best with the multiple camera angles and many, many viewings of the videos to construct the stage 48 direction based on my observations of the two class sessions. Stage direction appears as bracketed black text before, during and/or after lines within the play. There were, however, certain sections of the transcript that were unclear to me in the transcription process. Most of these instances are designated by stage direction within the script that the dialogue was indistinguishable, that the comments were overlapping, or situations of the like. In cases where there were audible lines that I was unable to confidently attribute to a specific person, I took my best guess at who the speaker was and then highlighted those names in magenta in order to be fully transparent. Lastly, in order to bring to life the three theoretical perspectives that I have used to look at this class, I have created three characters, Mary, Judith and Alice. These characters will interject their thoughts and ideas along the way adding insight from their particular lens. Alice will speak from the womanist perspective, and her commentaries will appear in purple text. Mary, whose comments will appear in blue text, represents the liberal feminist perspective. And Judith will bring light to postmodern feminist interrogations of the happenings, which will be in green text. When any of the characters speak beyond the happenings within the classroom (activities, discussion, and interaction among the students and the instructor), the instructor and students of the class will not hear or interact with them. The inner-monologues of the instructor, the added commentaries from myself as the researcher, and the voices of Mary, Alice and Judith will be interjected as the action of the classroom is momentarily placed on hold. As a result, bracketed stage direction for each of these comments ([aside]) demonstrates that the lines are set apart from the original transcript of the class sessions, and cues change in lighting as well. The additional 49 voices are intended as commentary to guide viewers to interrogate what is taught about gender within this multicultural/urban teacher education classroom. A quick reference of the specific codes that are included to guide the reading of the play include (For interpretation of the references to color in this and all other text, tables, and figures, the reader is referred to the electronic version of this dissertation): 1. Original text from the transcript is included as black text. For example: Ex. Imani: What are your earliest… Ex. Rhonda: I heard that 2. Stage direction is included as bracketed black text Ex. [Quiet while students were writing] Ex. [directed at Christopher] 3. Lines included where the speaker was unclear Ex. Cheryl: Mmm hmm 4. Inner-monologues by the instructor are included as black text highlighted yellow Ex. Imani: [aside] Students generally don’t… 5. Commentary added by the researcher is included as pink text Ex. Researcher: [aside] Cool! I introduced… 6. Additional characters created by the researcher to comment on the text of the transcript are inserted throughout with the following color codes: a. Alice who adds Womanist commentary is in purple text Ex. Alice: [aside] It is a very important… b. Judith who adds Postmodern Feminist commentary is in green text Ex. Judith: [aside] Exactly. It is critically… 50 c. Mary who adds Liberal Feminist commentary is in blue text Ex. Mary: [aside] Violence against women… You’ll find out more about the characters and voices described above as the play unfolds. You wouldn’t want me to tell you everything upfront would you? What would be the fun in that?! Well, even if you did, you will have to read on to find out for yourself. A key of these codes to refer to while reading the play also appears as Appendix A. There are multiple ways that this play can be used as a teaching tool. As a result, I have designed a Teaching Guide to accompany the play (See Appendix B). With any employment of this play as a teaching tool, following up with a facilitated discussion would maximize the depth and breadth of analysis. Therefore, I have also set up and provided a list of guiding questions to go with each scene located at the beginning of each scene within the researcher comments that introduce each scene in italics. There are no “right” answers to these questions. In fact, they are offered to evoke multiple responses in order to continue the discussion of multiple perspectives in answering the question, “What was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course?” I do offer, however, reflections about each scene following the action (also in italics) in order to guide facilitated discussion of issues and ideas raised in each scene from my perspective as the researcher. [Lights flash off and then on again two times] Looks like the show is about to start! I really hope you enjoy it. 51 Table 3: Cast of Characters Instructors: Dr. Imani Jones (bw) – Instructor Dr. Martin (ww) – Instructor of another section of the same course Students: Karla (bw) Jane (ww) Tonya (bw) Bethany (ww) Monica (bw) Lily (ww) Terrance (bm) Peter (wm) Aisha (bw) Cheryl (bw) Rasheena (bw) Nikki (bw) Cristina (bw) Marcus (bm) Laura (ww) Ashlee (ww) Timothy (wm) Stacey (ww) Summer (ww) Rhonda (bw) Sarah (ww) Chelsea (bw) Kelli (ww) Maria (lw) Christopher (bm) Rachel (bw) Additional Characters: Researcher (ww) – Self-explanatory Mary (ww) – Liberal Feminist commentator Alice (bw) – Womanist commentator Judith (ww) – Postmodern Feminist commentator black woman (bw) latina woman (lw) black man (bm) white man (wm) 52 white woman (ww) Figure 2: 10/14 Seating Chart (25 students + instructor) black woman latina woman black man white man 53 white woman Figure 3: 10/16 Seating Chart (24 students + instructor) black woman latina woman black man white man 54 white woman Act 1: Day One (10/14) Scene 1: Set Up Day One – Guiding Questions Here our adventure together begins. What you are about to witness is the inside of a multicultural teacher education classroom; it’s students and instructor, and the class activities and discussion specifically focused on the topic of gender. We are here to observe and interact with, in part, what is taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course. Today is the first, and only, day the instructor has scheduled to focus on the topic of gender. Throughout this scene, you will find out more about who the instructor is and information that she shared with me as the researcher and with her students throughout the course of the semester. What the instructor shares about herself gives us a window into who she is as an instructor, as well as who she is beyond the teaching of this class. As you will see, from each of the three theoretical perspectives, Mary, Alice and Judith have similar yet distinct ways of interpreting the relevance of the instructor’s identity characteristics in teaching this multicultural teacher education course. In addition, in this scene you will see how the instructor has situated the issue of gender within the course on the whole. Her use of time within this class period, as well as across the semester generally, helps us to see the ways in which the topic of gender is valued and/or devalued within the curriculum. Gender as a topic within multicultural teacher education, and multicultural education more broadly, is often scarcely included. When it is discussed, the presentation tends to be from a narrow perspective that speaks about issues of gender from a viewpoint of gender inequality. Throughout these class sessions, the analysis incorporated by Mary will bring forward this focus on gender inequality, gender bias, and gender discrimination 55 within education and society more broadly. I will call her perspective the Liberal Feminist lens because philosophically and ideologically the roots of Liberal Feminism grapple with gender inequality, sexism and gender discrimination. Along with the insight of Mary, there will be two more voices that will be incorporated to speak to two additional perspectives on what happens here in the class sessions of this course. Alice will provide analysis from a Womanist perspective. This perspective focuses on the lived experiences of individuals related to their multiple identity characteristics, specifically highlighting race, gender and social class, and you will see how Alice’s commentaries give voice to these experiences. Another woman, Judith, joins us today to interrogate the happenings within this course from a Postmodern Feminist perspective. Postmodern Feminism challenges the assumed binary system of gender and calls into question the so-called inherent nature of gender. Judith will point out and deconstruct traditional presentations of and references to gender in favor of a more nuanced viewpoint on gender as performed within specific relations of power. The following are guiding questions to spark your thinking about what is taught about gender and education within this first scene. You will find questions like these at the start of each scene. For the most part, these questions will be organized by theoretical perspective (Womanism, Liberal Feminism and Postmodern Feminism). This is not to say that each question cannot be answered through each of the three perspectives. In fact, there often will be responses and comments from more than one theoretical stance at any given moment throughout these class sessions. There will, however, also be questions at times (and this scene is one of those times) where the questions cut across all three perspectives and do not particularly lean toward any one of the three theoretical lenses. Here are the first questions to ponder and reflect upon as you watch these class sessions begin. 56 1. How important and/or relevant do you think that this instructor’s identity characteristics are to her teaching of this course? 2. What do you think are the significance of the following: a. Addressing issues of gender in the 8th week of the course b. Dedicating one day for the topic of gender within the course c. The instructor’s use of almost one quarter of the class time on logistics d. The instructor being tired after going over the class period logistics e. That the day on gender is also the due day of a major writing assignment Let’s see what is about to unfold… Scene 1: Set Up Day One – Script [Student side conversations prior to the start of class] 1. Imani: [aside] If you haven’t guessed yet, I’m the instructor for this class. My name is Imani. It’s a family name. I am the 3rd woman to be given the name in my family line. The 1st Imani was a slave and she then named her daughter Imani, who was born free in 1863 (the year peace was declared through the signing of The Emancipation Proclamation). This second Imani was my mother’s grandmother. And Kristy, my oldest daughter, is the 4th because her middle name is Imani. I am 34 years old. I am from a southern city, which is about 15 miles east of a larger southern city. I grew up in the south all of my life. I didn’t leave the south until I was 26, and then went to the New England area and stayed there for 5 years, and then now I’m living here in the Midwest. I’ve been here 3 years. I am the middle of 3 girls. And, my parents are from the south. I’m African American. I was schooled in public schools 1-12, I went to a private kindergarten, and then my undergrad degree was at a southern technical university. My graduate work was at a private southern 57 university and then a northeastern Ivy League school, so one Ivy League and one private university. I am married with 1 daughter and 1 on the way, 1 daughter on the way. Another interesting fact about me is that I am an engineer by training and an educator by birth. I studied engineering during my undergraduate years. However, I come from a line of educators, most of the women in my family are or were teachers, and I believe that teaching is my calling. So now you know a little bit about my background. 2. Researcher: [aside] Imani shared most of what she just spoke about related to her background and identities with her students at the beginning of the course. One notable exception was the fact that she attended an Ivy League institution for her PhD. I asked her about this and she shared that sometimes she shares that information with her students and sometimes she doesn’t and that she is unsure whether it creates an inaccessible image of who she is as the instructor or if it provides hope and inspiration. 3. Alice: [aside] It’s great to hear that the instructor has been transparent with her students about her identities and experiences. I am sure that it is uncommon for these students to be taught by an African American woman to begin with, and for her to be standing in front of a group of students such as these studying to be teachers themselves in urban areas, Imani serves as a role model and inspiration to her students of all races and genders. I find it interesting, yet not surprising, that she would not share with the students the fact that she studied at an Ivy League school. Although this could be extremely impactful for her students, particularly her students of color, to know that as an African American woman she was admitted to, studied at and received her degree from a prestigious Ivy League institution, the information could also serve to distance her from them. Discourses related to “acting white” sometimes prevent or inhibit students of color from entering into fields 58 and/or communities historically dominated by rich, white, men. Imani could be attempting to preserve her ability to form relationships and rapport with her students by leaving out the fact that she attended graduate school at an Ivy League school. 4. Imani: [still setting up for class, getting things out of her bag, etc.] Ummm, let me talk about (pause) what we’re gonna do today. Pass your papers around to a corner. Either Chelsea, Nikki, Ton-, Tonya 5. [student side conversations continue for quite a while until when Imani says “shhh” to the class. Kelli approaches Imani to ask her an individual question] 6. Imani: Remember no names, just student number [Timothy approaches Imani to ask her about a stapler] 7. Imani: [to Timothy] I don’t, I don’t bring a stapler to class [Timothy exits the classroom. Terrance approaches Imani] 8. Rasheena: [raises her hand and speaks at the same time] I didn’t print mine 9. Imani: [to Terrance and Rasheena] Ok, as long as it’s uploaded, I’ll…[indistinguishable] 10. Tonya: [indistinguishable question about names on the papers] 11. Imani: [to Tonya] No, but I don’t match ‘em up until after…[indistinguishable] If you didn’t print yours…[trailing off, indistinguishable] [Several students conversing with Imani about the names on the papers, indistinguishable] 12. Imani: [while plugging in her laptop] Ok, if you didn’t print it, you need to print it and bring it to my office later. [Timothy returns] 59 13. Imani: Cuz otherwise, uh, if I print it from Angel, you know, if I process [indistinguishable] know whose paper it is. So, make sure you do that, print it, bring it, drop it in the box on my office door. [Chelsea approaches Imani to ask an individual question] 14. Imani: [to Chelsea] No that’s fine. 15. Imani: Ok, and I’ll come around and get those, from the c-, the people on the corners. Ok, let me talk about what we’re gonna do today. 16. Imani: [standing centered in front of the class, reading from/looking at a sheet of paper and talking a lot with her hands] We are going to begin our discussion of gender. You had three readings for today, right? 3 relatively short readings on gender. Then on Thursday, shhhh, we’ll move into sexual orientation. And then next Tuesday, ummm, what’s the material for next Tuesday, I’m unclear? Umm, we begin talking about social mobility, so we move into a new area. So what I’m gonna do is back track. Dr. Martin and I are trying to catch up [laughs] on stuff. I’m gonna back track to Thursday because we didn’t get to talk about ESL and Bilingual Ed at all. But I’ll remind you that we’re gonna back track. So I just kinda wanted to let you know that. Ummm [indistinguishable]. Oh, let me pass some handouts out. And as I pass these out, I will collect these papers from the ends… [trailing off, indistinguishable]. [Instructor begins to pass out the handouts to the students on the ends nearest to her, Nikki, Chelsea, Tonya, and Kelli. student side conversations begin again and quiet down shortly after Imani says “shhh” again] 60 17. Imani: Alright, so what’s coming around, as you know in two weeks we are going to begin book chats with, shhhh, Dr. Martin’s class, ok? Everyone by now, hopefully, they should have obtained their book. 18. Imani: [to herself] Where is Monica? Oh she’s not here. 19. Imani: Umm, I realize that, who’s reading the McLeod, the “Ain’t No Makin’ It”? There’s two editions. [Several students raise their hands including Aisha, Kelli and Ashlee] 20. Ashlee: That’s so much money 21. Imani: [to Ashlee] Is it? 22. Ashlee: Yeah 23. Imani: There are two editions. It’s, umm, and I knew that, but I didn’t think about it, and somebody bought the second edition and I have the first edition, and I’m not sure how different they are. Ho-, how many of you got the second edition? [Several students raised their hands. indistinguishable question from Kelli about the book] 24. Imani: [to Kelli] I don’t know, he had the second edition? 25. Imani: [Nikki stands up and hands extra handouts back to Imani] Ok, look at, those of you who are reading “Ain’t No Makin’ It,” look at your edition when you get home and just send me an email, tell me what edition you got. I think they’re basically the same. I think the second edition has some add-on chapters at the end that we won’t, umm, focus on. [Marcus lifts up some extra handouts to show Imani that there are in front of him and she walks over to retrieve them from him] Umm, but I did upload the group list to Angel, so if you just want to look again, see who’s in your reading group, I uploaded that to Angel and you can find it there. [Christopher enters the class late, brings his paper to turn in to Imani 61 at the front of the class and then takes an open seat in the back of the class between Jane and Sarah] The purpose is for you to have some interactions with, umm, the, your other cohort members in the other class. So for three class sessions you will be doing these combined book chats, ok? With the other members of the class, so we’ll raise that partition, that wall raises and we’ll be one big happy class [Indistinguishable, seemingly good-natured, comments/reactions from students] 26. Imani: [laughs] Yeah, that wall raises 27. Imani: [Imani walks to Christopher and places the handouts in front of him] So, let me talk about these handouts, umm, very quickly, because this is to help you with reading the book. Although the chats don’t begin for two weeks, Dr. Martin and I want you to begin now because you can’t read a whole book in like 5 days, ok? So we want you to begin reading now. So let’s look at the blue sheet together, let’s all look at the blue sheet. [Pause as students get their blue sheets] 28. Researcher: [aside] It’s October 14th, week 8 of the course (about midway through the semester). This is the first, and only, day dedicated to the topic of gender within this multicultural education course. And, as you can see, the day starts off, not uncommonly, with some initial logistics. Unlike usual, however, this portion of the class takes up over 18 minutes of the 80-minute class period. And, given that there is a major class paper due on this day, students were less likely to read carefully, or at all, the assigned readings for this topic. In fact, several students mentioned this prior to the instructor’s arrival… What significance does any of this have? I guess we’ll see… Let’s fast-forward a bit so that we can get into the content for the day more quickly. 62 [Monica and Cheryl have entered the class late and taken the seats close to Imani on the left side of the classroom] 29. Imani: Ok, hoooh, that was, I’m tired from doing all that talking. [Pause] 30. Imani: Ok, no questions about that? Just show of hands, who doesn’t have their book? Just, you’re not gonna get in trouble, but [Many students raise their hands. A few student side conversations start and continue until Imani says “shhh” part way into introducing the next activity] 31. Imani: Alright, so just get it quickly so you can get started, cuz everybody else can get started. Alright, so get your book [indistinguishable] get started. Take some notes. Alright? 32. Researcher: [aside] “I’m tired from doing all that talking,” the instructor says after nearly 20 minutes of covering the logistics of papers due in class today and upcoming assignments and scheduling. Also tiring, perhaps, is the weight of the importance of the content in this course, her role as the instructor of it, her roles as the coordinator of the course as a whole, her investment and involvement in the Urban Education Cohort Program, the pressure of being a tenure-track assistant professor, is there more??? 33. Mary: [aside] Being a female professor in today’s society is not easy. Gender bias and discrimination persists in all levels of the education system. And, for women with children, or having children, the tenure system at the university level is additionally strenuous. 34. Alice: [aside] Not to mention the additional stresses in being an African American female in academia. Stories from women that speak to their experiences related to race, gender, and social class background and identity consistently show that the climates at many institutions of higher education are lonely and difficult to navigate. And, the intersections 63 of the content of the course with her personal identity markers cannot be overlooked. Is it more challenging emotionally to teach this course? More or less rewarding? How does this course weigh alongside other courses taught by her colleagues? 35. Judith: [aside] It’s quite complex. This instructor shows up as a direct, firm, yet down-toearth, African American woman professor who is about 7 months pregnant and still working full-time (and likely more) right up to her due date in early December. She is the course coordinator for this class (TE 201), and a leader within the Urban Education program of which this section of the course is a part. She is a mother, a wife, a teacher, a researcher, an advisor, and on top of it has welcomed the researcher to observe and analyze her teaching of this course. I would say there are countless reasons she could be tired… Scene 1: Set Up Day One – Reflections As you can see, Alice, Judith and Mary have different, yet complimentary perspectives on what is happening in this classroom. By seeing their comments here and throughout, it is my hope that you will begin to understand the ways that their theoretical viewpoints (womanist, postmodern feminist, and liberal feminist) address the question, “What is taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course.” In answering that question, the women will look at the teacher, the students and the content of the course. In this specific scene, there are two major issues that emerge through the transcript and concurrent commentaries. 1. The impact of the instructor’s identities on teaching this course 2. The salience of where and how issues of gender are situated within the course content The instructor shares quite a bit about herself in this opening scene in her introductory monologue. And, as I made mention of earlier, the instructor shared most of the background 64 information from this monologue with her students in the first weeks of the course. Overall, the instructor presents herself as more-or-less transparent to her students, which seems to increase her approachability and ability to relate with her students. Of the three women commenting within the scenes (Judith, Mary and Alice), Alice has the most interest in how and what the instructor shares about herself. This makes sense due to the relational nature of womanist theory, and the infusion of storytelling and the importance of lived experiences as related to what is understood and taught about gender and education within and beyond this multicultural teacher education course. Each of the women, however, interprets and values the relevance and impact of the instructor’s identities, as well as her sharing of them, as we saw in this brief introductory scene. Not to mention the interest in one particular line of the instructors, “I’m tired from doing all that talking.” Within each of the theorists comments following that line we begin to see some of the commonalities as well as some of the distinctions between the women’s outlooks and focal points as they view the class sessions of this course. Within this scene we see Mary’s focus on experiences of gender bias and discrimination, issues of gender inequality within education and society more broadly. Alice speaks up as it relates to the intersection of multiple identity characteristics, particularly race, gender and social class status. And Judith points us to interrogate the complex situations and circumstances of the participants in relation to relations of power and the performance of gender. We see these three perspectives complementing each other and differentiated from each other specifically in response to the instructor’s comment about being tired after all of the talking she did to discuss and describe the logistical components of the course at the start of this class session. Mary presumes that Imani may be tired because of the ways in which being a female professor can be draining on a woman, especially a woman who is pregnant and raising small children while 65 moving through the tenure process. Alice agrees with these points and then adds on the layer of the instructor being both a woman and African American to the discussion. Alice also challenges viewers to consider the stress on Imani as an African American woman teaching a course about multicultural issues and whether or not her teaching and involvement with this course are valued as much or as easily as her colleagues who are not African American women. Lastly, we heard from Judith who adds to the complexity and nuance of all of the roles and responsibilities Imani with which moves through the teaching of this course. Seeking to uncover and examine the specific contexts in which Imani’s teaching of this class session is situated, Judith expands our perspective on what may have led to this instructors comment about being tired. Also in this scene we get an initial snapshot of how the topic of gender is situated within this course more broadly. This is something that the three women (Alice, Mary and Judith) know nothing about because they have entered the classroom for the first time on this day. As the researcher, I know much more about the course and how it is organized both from my own involvement in teaching and supporting the coordination of the course. Therefore, I included this set of questions at the beginning of the scene: What do you think are the significance of the following: a. Addressing issues of gender in the 8th week of the course b. Dedicating one day for the topic of gender within the course c. The instructor’s use of almost one quarter of the class time on logistics d. That the day on gender is also the due day of a major writing assignment These questions are included as a way to reflect generally on the teaching of gender and education within a multicultural teacher education course such as this. As the scenes proceed, these questions will be addressed along the way. 66 Scene 2: Free Writing – Guiding Questions In the scene that follows, you will see an activity where the students are encouraged to both write about experiences, memories and messages related to gender and share their writing in pairs and then in the whole class setting. This activity gives us insight into how the instructor’s pedagogy as well as the value she places on her students’ voices and stories. This scene also engages viewers in an interrogation of the location of the people in the classroom, both the teacher and the students. Here we begin to question the interactions between the students and the instructor, as well as between the students as locations for learning more about gender and multicultural teacher education. Each of the theoretical commentaries, provided by Alice, Judith and Mary, assist us in seeing what is taught about gender within this classroom from each of their unique perspectives (Womanism, Postmodern Feminism and Liberal Feminism). They help us to see what is taught explicitly through content and direct instruction, as well as what is taught implicitly through language, interaction and the inclusion (or omission) of certain topics, questions, or discussion. The guiding questions for this scene are included below. I have divided them up into three sets of questions because each set of questions primarily correlates with one of the theoretical perspectives. You will see within the scene that the lines between the perspectives are often blurry, however, I offer these questions as a way to keep in mind each of the perspectives as you watch the next scene. It is also primarily these issues that the three women (Judith, Mary and Alice) will highlight and comment on as the scene unfolds. Liberal Feminism (highlighted by Mary) 1. In what ways do the students’ experiences growing up reflect gender bias and discrimination? 67 2. The instructor mentions that she tries to call on students equally by gender. How successful do you think she is with this? Womanism (highlighted by Alice) 1. How do the experiences shared here by the students differ based on race and gender? 2. What can we learn about gender and race based on the location of the students and instructor in the classroom? 3. Why do you think the instructor might not share her own personal experiences in this class session? 4. How does the instructor interact with her students in ways that demonstrates shared understanding and experiences? 5. In what ways could the instructor have incorporated multiple identity characteristics into the free writing exercise? Postmodern Feminism (highlighted by Judith) 1. In what ways do students share personal experiences that transcend the traditional boy/girl binary system of gender? 2. What does the instructor mean when she talks about “doing gender”? 3. What kinds of comments from which students elicit boisterous laughter from both students and the instructor? Scene 2: Free Writing – Script [Students are involved in side conversations with each other as the instructor moves from covering announcements and logistics about the course to the topic for the day. The instructor is standing in the front of the classroom swinging her arms to the side and then 68 together in front of her and clapping her hands as they come together in front of her stomach.] 1. Imani: Ok, let’s get ready. Take out a piece of paper, we’re gonna do a little free writing around gender, so let’s set your mind in gender. [Students move around to get their paper ready to write on. Side conversation between Imani and Monica that is indistinguishable about the “Ain’t No Makin’ It” book, which Monica hands over to Imani] 2. Imani: [aside] I like having them reflect on childhood memories. I like the idea of having students start out reflecting, on any day, historically, on the recent past, or on their childhood past, writing or pairing and sharing at the beginning of the class before we go into a discussion that’s guided by specific questions. 3. Researcher: [aside] The pedagogical move by the instructor to start with her students reflecting, writing and sharing about their childhood experiences shows us the value she places on engaging the students’ on not only an academic level, but also a personal level. This is just one of the many moves that the instructor makes regarding the content and structure of this class session focused on the topic of gender. These instructor choices will be one primary site of interrogation by Mary, Alice and Judith, the three theorists who are joining us today. Pay close attention to the overlapping and yet distinct ways that these three women will explore teacher moves like this one, as well as moves the students make and the content included on the topic of gender. These three locations (teacher moves, students moves, and course content) will all be sites of interrogation and understanding for the stories that emerge from this multicultural teacher education course as we examine what is taught about gender and education. 69 4. Imani: Shhhh, doesn’t take any chatting. We need to move quickly. I’m going to holler out some questions to you until I can get my power point ready. And I want you to, umm, write about these, ok? We’re focusing on the social construction of gender. Alright, the first one, what are your earliest memories of how you learned roles [emphasis on the word roles] for being a boy or girl. I’ll repeat it, what are your earliest memories of how you learned roles for being a boy or girl. Earliest memories. Write about that for me. What are your earliest memories of how you learned roles for being a boy or girl? [Quiet while students were writing. Imani works to get the technology set up] 5. Mary: [aside] Starting with early memories of how the students learned roles for being boys and girls is a fantastic way to uncover the ways gender bias and sexism exist and are instilled at early ages and maintained throughout the lives of girls and boys as they grow into women and men. Boys and girls are taught from birth about what it means to be a girl and grow into a woman and what it means to be a boy and grow into a man. The roles, particularly for girls and women become restrictions on what they can and cannot do and be. What may seem benign at first, playing with dolls and pretending to cook, leads girls into the domesticated roles that become oppressive constraints to only be mothers and wives in their futures. 6. Imani: What are your earliest memories of how you learned roles for being a boy or girl? [Quiet while students were writing. Imani continues to set up the technology] 7. Alice: [aside] This activity also provides students an opportunity to incorporate their experiences as children from varied racial and class backgrounds in addition as exploring their memories of learning roles for being boys and girls are inseparable from these other identity characteristics. I am eager to see the ways in which the students share their stories 70 and look at the ways that they have learned and lived out their racial, gendered and social class identities. 8. Judith: [aside] I am curious, however, about how the framing of gender within the binary system (‘boy or girl’) directs students to remember only certain memories. I wonder what memories could be evoked by asking students about memories of learning about gender without specifying the roles of boy and girl? It is extremely important to recognize the ways that instructors can limit or expand a reflection activity such as this through the language that is used to introduce and facilitate it. 9. Imani: Ok, I’m gonna read out the second question. You still may be writing, and that’s ok. What messages did the people around you pass onto you about being a girl or boy? What messages did the people around you pass onto you about being a girl or boy? And those people could be parents, teachers, friends, just people around you. What kind of messages did they pass on about being a girl or boy? [Quiet while students were writing] 10. Imani: What kind of messages did you receive? [Quiet while students were writing. Imani looks in her bag/purse for something.] 11. Imani: And then the third question: How did these messages affect how you thought about yourself? [pause. Imani begins to walk around the classroom as she continues to talk] So first I asked earliest memories, secondly what messages, and who was conveying messages, and then third, how did these messages affect how you thought about yourself? [Quiet while students were writing. Imani continues to set things up in the classroom] 12. Imani: Take about one more minute to write on all three. [Quiet while students were writing. Imani organizes extra handouts and then sits down] 71 13. Imani: Thirty more seconds. [Pause] 14. Imani: Alright, I want you to share for a few minutes with your, uh, the person next to you. Umm, Chelsea you share with Lily and Stacey [directed more quietly at Chelsea], and then everybody else has a partner. Share w- based on each question, 1, 2 and 3. Make sure each person has a chance to share. [Time spent in pairs sharing answers to questions – indistinguishable. Imani spends time looking through the “Ain’t No Makin’ It” book from Monica. Also during this time, Imani gets a technology aide (who appears to be a woman) to help her set up the PowerPoint display] 15. Alice: [aside] Notice the location of the students in the classroom. Can you see how the students are situated related to race and gender? Most striking is that 8 of the 10 black women are located ‘front and center’ by the instructor. And, as you can see, for this activity, that means that working in pairs from where the students chose to sit pairs up 8 black women with each other. To me, this shows how sitting near each other can provide black women opportunities to share with each other in formal and informal ways. And, sitting closer to the instructor allows them to develop that relationship with their instructor as well. Fascinating! 16. Imani: Ok, take about two more minutes. [Time spent in pairs sharing answers to questions – indistinguishable. Imani and technology aide still working on seting up the PowerPoint display] 72 17. Imani: Alright, let’s wrap that up and let me take a few comments from the group, first looking at question one. So, umm, earliest memories, some folks tell me a little bit about earliest memories. [Hands raised: Terrance, Rhonda, Jane, Ashlee] 18. Imani: [aside] When calling on students, I try to think about who has spoken that week or that day. I try to think about cultural difference balance, race and gender are the two that are most visible. I’m mostly thinking about who has talked and who has not. I don’t want any one voice to dominate in the class, or have students that can think they can skate without talking at all. So every once and a while I will call on someone whose hand is not raised 19. Mary: [aside] This is definitely an extremely important issue related to classroom dynamics and pedagogy. All too often, boys are called on more frequently, even by well-meaning instructors. The fact that Imani tries to monitor who she calls on is a great step toward a gender bias-free classroom. In order to gauge the reliability of Imani’s self-monitoring, I am also keeping track of who raises their hands and who is called on by gender so that we can see if she is successful in her endeavor of achieving balanced participation in these class sessions. 20. Imani: Jane 21. Jane: Uh, mine was probably Barbies because you had Barbies you need to brush their hair, and you had princess Barbie, and like beach Barbie, and so you dress them in these cute outfits and then all the boys would have like G.I. Joe, like with the strong man who like went, like the soldier, and then Ken who’s strong and had his surf board. 22. Imani: [Still working on her laptop to set up the PowerPoint presentation] Umm hmm 73 23. Jane: So you just get to see the differences between them. The women are supposed to have pretty dresses 24. Imani: Umm hmm 25. Jane: and the guys are just supposed to be strong. 26. Imani: Umm hmm, Ok, Ok, good. [Hands raised: Terrance, Ashlee, Peter, Cheryl, Aisha] Ashlee [Imani walks away from the computer podium and then back to it while Ashlee speaks] 27. Ashlee: Umm, me and Timothy both put both put like the separate lines in like kindergarten and preschool. How there’s like a boys line and a girl line 28. Imani: Ah ha [big head nod and affirming smile] 29. Ashlee: Yeah, and then also I put like umm like when we went to like assemblies or church 30. Imani: Umm hmm 31. Ashlee: in my school we had to sit boy-girl-boy-girl to separate 32. Imani: Ah, yes 33. Ashlee: so the guys like wouldn’t goof around 34. Imani: Mmm hmm [Student laughter] 35. Imani: Ok, so those are some early memories. [Hands raised: Terrance & Peter (never lowered), Tonya, Cheryl] Peter [Imani goes back to focusing on her laptop for a bit and then crosses her arms and walks to the front and right of it closer to Peter] 36. Peter: Um, my, my earliest memory was, uh, I I lived with my grandmother for a couple years of my life, and umm every time my cousins came over I would, I would always hide 74 because whenever they’d come over, umm, my uncle, who’s my mom’s twin, he would always kind of make these little comments, like, “Why aren’t you outside?” 37. Imani: Mmmm 38. Peter: “You’re never outside.” 39. Imani: Mmm hmm 40. Peter: Like, “What, what are you, what are you doing?” You know 41. Imani: Mmm hmm [fixes her hair] 42. Peter: Like, “Why do you just, why do you like, why do you like to watch T.V.?” 43. Imani: Mmm hmm [still fixing her hair] 44. Peter: “Why do you…” and it’s just like, Ok, I’m getting away from that! 45. Imani: Right [Student and instructor laughter] 46. Peter: So [laughter], I’d be in closets and… 47. Imani: Ok, Ok, [Hands raised: Terrance (never fully lowered), Tonya, Cheryl] Terrance 48. Terrance: I was about to say, yeah, when I was like you know I would say like yeah around kindergarten cuz, you know like dudes played with like G.I. Joes and like Hot Wheels and then you had girls that played with like little plastic kitchens, [Student laughter. Imani walks over closer to Terrance and then proceeds to turn the front lights off (which increases the view of the PowerPoint projection)] 49. Terrance: and then uh Easy-Bake Ovens and whatnot [Student laughter] 50. Terrance: So you know [Lots of student side conversations] 75 51. Imani: Shhh [Imani walks back to the front of the classroom and picks up the attendance sheet from in front of Monica on her way] 52. Terrance: Gender roles was already bein’ uh, you know, assigned or whatever through your toys. 53. Imani: Ok, alright, so again some more kindergarten… 54. Mary: [aside] Note that the first comments from students all reflected the drastically different gender roles perpetuated by toys and other cultural and societal institutions like schools and families. Both Jane and Terrance refer to the toys that girls and boys played with mentioning Barbie and plastic kitchens for girls and G.I. Joe and Hot Wheels for boys. These toys encourage girls to play dress up and practice their roles as future mothers and wives. Boys instead are encouraged to be strong and drive fast cars. These roles consistently and pervasively perpetuate gender inequality and sexism by teaching boys and girls at young ages who they can and cannot be. 55. Judith: [aside] Yes, however, you have to acknowledge that the question students were given to answer asked specifically about the roles they learned for being boys and girls. The framing of these questions within the binary system of gender perhaps encourages students to search for messages that highlighted the distinctions between the two traditional gender identities. Had the instructor asked a question encouraging students to reflect upon how they learned to perform their gender in different contexts and within different relationships, there would likely have been a more varied set of stories offered in response to that inquiry. 76 56. Imani: [Hands raised: Summer, Cheryl, Rhonda, Tonya] Yeah, Tonya [Imani stands beside computer podium facing Tonya with one hand leaning against the podium and the other hand on her hip] [Cheryl gets up to get attendance sheet and bring it back with her to her seat] 57. Tonya: Umm, me and Rasheena’s was like related, because I used to, umm, I noticed when I used to always be around like older males when I was being potty trained, and I used to always wanna stand up, and my mom would always be like girls sit down, boys stand up [Student and instructor laughter] 58. Imani: Ok, ok. [Hands raised: Rhonda (never fully lowered), Rasheena. Imani turns toward the center of the room still standing behind the computer podium area] So we have some very, Oh, Rhonda, go ahead 59. Rhonda: Umm, when I was younger, I was very bad at sitting. So, you know, like when I would wear a dress, my mom would always be like, “Close your legs, girls don’t sit with their legs open” 60. Imani: Mmm, hmm. [Rasheena raises her hand. Imani moves into summary statement, without calling on Rasheena, standing behind podium area talking with her hands] 61. Imani: So some messages seems like family members, school, right, church, uh, how we were patterned to sit or even line up, things of that nature, the toys we played with, the toys we saw, that influenced us, so tho th the early memories, ok, for learning these roles. 62. Judith: [aside] What is particularly interesting about these comments is the way that these students have learned about gender by being told what was inappropriate or unusual about their behavior. Both Tonya and Rhonda shared experiences where they were taught about 77 how to be a girl by being told not to act in a certain way. Tonya was told by her mom not to stand up to pee and Rhonda was told by her mom not to sit with her legs open. 63. Alice: [aside] Further, what is being taught and learned here is not specific only to gender. Notice that these African American girls were both reprimanded by their mothers about how to act. Situations like these can teach children about social class, race, education, and many other discourses. Through these two situations we can identify discourses of motherhood, of race, of gender, and perhaps even of social class. Mothers of African American girls are often quite strict with their daughters about how to act as a way to prepare them to be African American women in a sometimes harshly prejudicial society. 64. Imani: Umm, let’s talk about the messages. What messages did the people around you pass on? And some of that’s connected in the examples you all were sharing. [Hands raised: Bethany, Cheryl, Rasheena] Rasheena 65. Rasheena: My granny, like, she used to just think girls were just supposed to be, you know, like like trophies, and they was just supposed to be pretty, you’re not supposed to cuss, you’re supposed to talk softly 66. Imani: Mmm, hmm. 67. Rasheena: you’re supposed to always have your n-, your nails done, your hair done 68. Imani: Mm hmm. 69. Rasheena: like, things like that, so I just really thought that was 70. Imani: the message 71. Rasheena: how girls were supposed to be. [Imani picks up her bag/purse from the floor and puts it on the chair next to her. Tonya gets up and gives attendance sheet to Nikki] 78 72. Imani: Mmm hmm, very neat, very clean 73. Rasheena: Mmm hmm. 74. Imani: prissy. Ok, someone else, [Hands raised: Bethany, Cheryl, Nikki] yes, go ahead Bethany. [Imani searches in her bag for something] 75. Bethany: My parents never really restricted me from activities or toys or anything just because I was a girl. I had Hot Wheels and I had Barbies, and I had a play kitchen and I had like a hockey stick [Student and instructor laughter] 76. Imani: Mmm hmm. 77. Bethany: So, yeah, serious street hockey, ok? [Student and instructor laughter. Imani puts her bag back on the floor and puts a flash drive on the table] 78. Bethany: Um, they pretty much taught me that like girls can do anything boys can do and I was never really forced to like confine myself to 79. Imani: To one. Ok, good, good. 80. Mary: [aside] Unfortunately, the sentiment raised by Bethany that “girls can do anything boys can do” is not always echoed throughout girls’ schooling experiences. Here Bethany jokes about having played with Barbies and a play kitchen as well as Hot Wheels and a hockey stick. Too many girls, however, end up getting sent messages within their experiences of schooling about what they can’t do and being dissuaded from math/science fields and other activities that are deemed “boys only.” It is great to hear stories like Bethany’s where she did not feel forced to confine herself to certain activities or aspirations. 79 81. Imani: [Hands raised: Cheryl, Tonya, Nikki] Yes, Nikki. [puts flash drive into laptop] 82. Nikki: Umm, I remember that my mom used to, umm, cuz I used to play with my cousins all the time 83. Imani: Mmm hmm. 84. Nikki: And so I would want to be around them all the time, and they was all boys, and know she said to me to stop playing with them before I turned into a boy. 85. Imani: Mmmm. [Student and instructor laughter] 86. Imani: So very explicit [Student and instructor laughter. Imani reaches to her neck at her necklace that has fallen off] 87. Imani: about that. Mmm hmm. 88. Nikki: And, yeah, 89. Imani: Ok 90. Nikki: the same thing, like Rasheena went, she used to keep my hair in pigtails 91. Imani: And styled. 92. Nikki: Polish our nails pink 93. Imani: Mmm hmm 94. Nikki: and make me wear skirts 95. Imani: Mmm hmm 96. Nikki: and stuff like that. 97. Imani: So messages around what to wear, how to look 98. Nikki: Oh 80 99. Imani: That kind of thing 100. Alice: [aside] It is evident that the instructor can relate to the experiences of Nikki and Rasheena based on her additions to their comments. Not only does Imani respond to these students’ comments with “mmm hmm”s and other acknowledgments, she also elaborates on what they are sharing. When Rasheena was talking about her Granny teaching her how “girls were supposed to be,” Imani added in “very neat, very clean” and “prissy.” In the same way, when Nikki was sharing about wearing her hair in “pigtails,” Imani added, “and styled” to the student’s comments. I would argue that this is one way that Imani can convey her experiences as an African American girl growing up in the U.S. and develop relationships with her African American women students. It is also interesting that these interactions are right before and after Bethany’s sharing about how she was taught that girls could do anything boys could do. The juxtaposition of experiences shared by these students, two African American women and one White woman, shed light on the sometimes differing messages that girls receive growing up based on race, gender and other social characteristics. 101. Nikki: Quick, I got one more thing. 102. Imani: Yeah [Hands raised: Summer, Cheryl, Terrance, Nikki. Imani begins to reattach her necklace] 103. Nikki: And I remember when I was in school, I think I was like first grade, I don’t know who made this poem, but I remember it was this poem that we had to recite. 104. Imani: Mmm hmm. 105. Nikki: And I know in the poem it always used to, it said that, umm, ladies should be seen and not heard. 81 106. Imani: Yeah 107. Nikki: I don’t know [indistinguishable] 108. Imani: [talking with her hands with the ends of the necklace in each hand] I’ve hear-, I I don’t know either, but that is a common phrase, right? How many other people have heard that phrase? [Several students raise their hands including Christopher, Rasheena, Bethany, Monica, Rhonda, Ashlee and Aisha. Terrance and Summer’s hands were already raised prior to the question. Summer raises her hand a little higher. Peter does not raise his hand.] 109. Peter: I’ve heard it about kids 110. Christopher: Yeah 111. Imani: Women should be seen not heard? 112. Rasheena: Kids [Additional student comments including other ‘yeahs’ and ‘kids’] 113. Imani: You said what? 114. Peter: Kids, kids 115. Imani: Oh, about kids too, yeah, mmm hmm. [Hands raised: Summer & Terrance (never lowered hands)] Summer [Imani tries again to reattach her necklace] 116. Summer: Umm, 117. Rhonda: I heard that 118. Summer: I remember, like my my parents were the same like they didn’t really restrict you know like, you know, certain toys or whatever 119. Imani: Mmm hmm [Walks a bit closer to Summer while still trying to attach her necklace] 82 120. Summer: but I, I always remember like around holidays, like, my sister and I were always expected to help my mom with like baking 121. Imani: Mmm hmm, mmm hmm. 122. Summer: Or when my family came over, like, you know, we would always make taffy or buckeyes 123. Imani: Sure. [Walks closer yet to Summer and crosses her arms] 124. Summer: or something, and like my brother never used to be involved when those 125. Imani: In those [indistinguishable] 126. Summer: Like kind of things. And he, he would like be watching football or something, but then like we would have to spend like all day like baking all these things for 127. Imani: Mmm hmm, mmm hmm 128. Summer: Them to eat [laugh] 129. Imani: Very interesting. [Terrance raises his hand. Imani walks toward the computer podium and with her back to Terrance waves her left hand toward him] Yeah, Terrance. 130. Terrance: I was gonna say, I like the Easy-Bake-Oven [Student laughter. Imani stops behind the computer podium and nods her head] 131. Terrance: [sitting forward with a big smile on his face] It was good – the chocolate cakes and whatnot, but, you know I had si- like 6 older brothers, so the likelihood of me like gettin’ to play with that, was like 132. Imani: Right 133. Terrance: you know, very, very slim, you know, cuz I was always told boys were supposed to be tough, you know 134. Imani: Mmm hmm. 83 135. Terrance: That’s true. 136. Imani: So this message around toughness. 137. Terrance: Yeah. And work hard and whatnot. 138. Imani: Yup, yup. 139. Peter: They had the queasy bake [Aisha raises her hand. Imani moves to the next question without calling on Aisha 140. Imani: Ok. Now, third question brings it back to how, how then these messages made you think about yourself, alright, so let’s get a few comments there. [Hands raised: Tonya, Maria, Cheryl, Marcus] Maria. 141. Maria: Umm, it always made me feel like I wasn’t girly enough. 142. Imani: Mmmm. 143. Maria: I’m very tomboyish 144. Imani: Mmm hmm. 145. Maria: And it made me, I feel like I have more male characteristics than I do female characteristics 146. Imani: Mmm hmm. [Walks from behind the computer podium and toward Maria] 147. Maria: And it kinda sucks sometimes, cuz I would like to be girly, I just don’t, and 148. Imani: Just wasn’t you 149. Maria: Yeah, I just, yeah 150. Imani: Yeah, mmm hmm, ok. [Hands raised: Nikki, Aisha, Tonya, Marcus] Marcus 151. Marcus: To be totally honest, umm, as a child I thought I was gay, umm 152. Imani: [standing in the center of the classroom in front of Marcus with her hands behind her back] Mmm 84 153. Marcus: Because in my mind I, I didn’t know about the required sexual, uh, requirement of being homosexual or whatever 154. Imani: Mmm hmm [begins to cross her arms and then reaches to catch her necklace which has fallen off again] 155. Marcus: But like in elementary school it was like “Aw, you gay” like you we’d say that all the time 156. Imani: [has turned and gone back around by the computer podium to put her necklace in her purse] Right 157. Marcus: And I thought it was just actin’ like a girl, and every time my Dad he’d be like, “Strengthen your wrists boy.” [Student and instructor laughter. Imani puts her purse back on the floor] 158. Marcus: And so like me and my brothers used to stay up super late like laughing, just actin’ crazy and stuff, and this was like six through ten or whatever 159. Imani: [now standing next to table by computer with one hand on the table and the other hand on her hip] Uh huh, uh huh 160. Marcus: And he would say, “Stop all that gigglin’, y’all gigglin’, like girls.” And, I’m like [Heavy student and instructor laughter] 161. Marcus: Now, now when I think about it, our voices were already high, like 162. Imani: Right 163. Marcus: I don’t understand 164. Imani: They were not that deep [Heavy student and instructor laughter and indistinguishable comments/discussion] 165. Imani: Ok, so making 85 [Marcus makes a deep, mocking, laugh, and students and instructor continue to laugh. Hands raised: Nikki (never fully lowered), Cheryl, Aisha, Laura] 166. Imani: So making you fee-, again, sounds like Maria, this notion of feeling like you’re not conforming to what you should be conforming to. 167. Judith: [aside] Here again, you can see the ways that transcending gender norms can lead to discipline and correction that urges people to conform to the binary system of gender performance. Marcus shares his experiences growing up and being told by his father that he needed to stop giggling with his brothers “like girls” and to “strengthen his wrists.” Marcus was sent the message that acting in feminine ways was unacceptable. He also grew up believing that being gay was about acting like a girl, further demonstrating that discourses of gender and sexuality are often conflated. Additionally, notice the way that laughter, an incredibly powerful tool that can be used to invoke power in relationship with others, erupts when certain examples of gender non-conformity are discussed. Throughout the stories that Marcus shared there was boisterous and frequent laughter from other students as well as the instructor. This laughter provides Marcus an opportunity to maintain his personal power by joking about the stories and as a result distancing him from the vulnerability associated with sharing such intimate and potentially emotional memories. 168. Mary: [aside] It is notable, however, that when Maria shared her experiences of not feeling like she has been able to conform to the gender norms expected of her as a woman that there was no joking and no laughter as a result. To me, this speaks to the seriousness of the impact of the expectations and pressure placed on women to conform to the roles of woman, wife, mother, caretaker, and often superwoman within their lives, families and society as a whole. Just as Imani explicitly stated at the start of this class period that she 86 was “tired,” for women the weight and burden of not living up to the standards women expect themselves to live up to is immense. And so, although Imani draws connections between the sentiments shared by Marcus about not conforming to the expectations of his father, the difference in the ways Maria and Marcus presented their stories (one very seriously and the other in a joking manner) and the ways their stories were received by the other students and the instructor (again, one very seriously and the other in a joking manner) speaks to the distinct ways that girls and women are more deeply impacted by the effects of the sexist and unequal society that we live in. [Hands raised: Laura (never fully lowered), Nikki, Aisha, Tonya] 169. Imani: Aisha [walks in front of the computer podium and leans back on it with one elbow] 170. Aisha: The messages that were portrayed made me like think that I had to like do gender like be a cheerleader 171. Imani: Oh, uh huh 172. Aisha: You know what I’m sayin’ like 173. Imani: Perform certain roles 174. Aisha: Yeah, perform certain roles, like 175. Imani: Mmm hmm 176. Aisha: Be a cheerleader 177. Imani: Mmm hmm 178. Aisha: Dance, join the choir 179. Imani: Sure, mmm hmm 180. Aisha: Just do the stuff that girls do. That’s it 87 181. Imani: Mmm hmm, mmm hmm. [Hands raised: Laura (never fully lowered), Tonya, Cheryl, Nikki] Laura 182. Laura: Umm, my parents were pretty like gender neutral when I was growing up, just like they’d let me go off like rough and play, my like none of my, umm, like my room wasn’t really pink 183. Imani: Pink or [trailing off, indistinguishable response from instructor] 184. Laura: And stuff, whatever, that wasn’t really their thing. They were never really like ooh, be a girl, like my dad took me hunting and fishing and stuff 185. Imani: Mmm hmm 186. Laura: But then my brother got older and he kinda started doing that stuff and then I got steered, moving into more like the feminine 187. Imani: Activities 188. Laura: Activities and stuff 189. Imani: And things, uh huh 190. Laura: And now it’s, my mom is very like, ever since I’ve been in like fourth or fifth grade [Imani walks around behind the computer podium] 191. Imani: Mmm hmm 192. Laura: She’s very all about like always look your best 193. Imani: Mmm hmm 194. Laura: Be polite 195. Imani: Mmm hmm 196. Laura: Umm, like I would get my hands slapped off the table, like 197. Imani: Uh huh, uh huh 88 198. Laura: Like if my manners weren’t good type thing like don’t [instructor talking over end of sentence] [Tonya never fully lowers her hand until Imani makes the following concluding comments] 199. Imani: Yeah, I mean these, yeah. It sounds like these things, from the comments we’ve heard, people felt like they weren’t conforming, right, to those roles, and so feeling boxed in, [Imani walks to her left and bumps into the chair there which she then moves farther left to stand behind the table freely] feeling like you had to, um, conform or and p-, p-, perform. I think, who were our, umm, was it Tonya, Rhonda and Jane posted for today? [Non-verbal, or inaudible affirmative response(s)] 200. Imani: Yeah, you all should read their posts. Umm, I thought they were very interesting connected to the readings, which is what we’re about to segue into, but, umm, you know, this notion of performing gender, doing gender. And thinking about just in your every day activities, how do you do gender? [uses air quotes with “do gender”] How do you perform gender roles? Umm, is it through the way you dress, or the way you think, or, umm, you know, what you wear. How do you do gender, because we all perform it in various ways. [Walking back to computer podium] And we may perform more closer to the norm, or further away from the norm. 201. Judith: [aside] Exactly! Imani is urging her students here to interrogate the ways that they perform gender, insisting “we all perform it in various ways.” It is critically important to explore the ways that people perform or “do” gender, and the relations of power associated with the relative normalcy or rebellion against normalcy that play out on individual and societal scales. 89 202. Alice: [aside] Yes, and looking at the intersections between multiple identity positions related to race, gender, and social class can also illuminate the complexity of how experiences of people and students from various identities and positionalities can increase our understanding of gender issues in multicultural teacher education. The instructor herself could have even added more to this activity and the discussion about it by sharing her own stories, a natural way to incorporate the intersection of race, gender and class identity characteristics. Making these relationships more explicit would enhance this discussion even more! Scene 2: Free Writing – Reflections Primary issues raised by Mary, Alice and Judith involved the location of the students in the classroom, the interaction between the instructor and the students, the choice and structure of the activity free writing activity, and the ways the comments and stories shared by the students reflected the three perspectives – Womanism, Postmodern Feminism, and Liberal Feminism. Let’s take some time now to unpack and examine the commentaries provided by Alice, Judith and Mary throughout this scene. It is notable that Judith’s focus is predominantly on interrogating the ways the instructor and the students are creating instances that demonstrate what gender is, through their language, their interaction and through their location. She highlights parts of the scene that speak to gender performance or how people “do” gender within and beyond the binary system (boy/girl). Judith also points out and adds to the instructor’s use of language that promotes an understanding of gender as performance. The stories that students told about their experiences growing up and not conforming to the norms of their expected gender roles were of particular interest to Judith. This allows us to see how children and adults learn and reinforce gender 90 norms and power relations by being “corrected” in circumstances and interactions where their behaviors falls outside the box of “girl” or “boy” for children, and “man” or “woman” for adults. And, Judith also points out how the free writing activity itself was framed within the traditional binary system of gender and gendered power relations that reinforce a two-gender reality within our culture and our classrooms. This framing of the activity, according to Judith, could have had an impact on the ways the students both interpreted and engaged in the activity. The perspective brought to light by Alice is one that focuses on the experiences shared and enacted within the classroom that show the interconnection between multiple identities, specifically race and gender. Alice comments on the relationships that are established related to race and gender identities through the locations of the students and the instructor in the classroom, the interactions between and among all of them, and the stories and histories that the instructor and the students share, or do not share, within this classroom. The free writing activity allowed for students to reflect upon their unique experiences growing up and learning about gender, which are inevitably linked with their multiple identity characteristics included, but not limited to, their racial and social class identities. Based on the location of the students in the classroom, African American women were able to share more intimately with each other in the pair-sharing part of the free writing activity. The instructor was also able to share with the African American women in her responses to their stories. This points to a possible reason why these students may have chosen their seats in closer proximity to the instructor, as well as each other. Alice also speaks to the possibilities available to the instructor to explicitly include issues of multiple identity characteristics into activities that encourage students to reflect on and share their personal stories. One possible way to do this, Alice suggests, is for the instructor to discuss 91 her own reflections on the free writing activities and making the connections for students between multiple identity issues, especially gender, social class and race. Mary, on the other hand, focuses her attention to the situations and content that center on issues of gender bias and discrimination. Stories about gender differences or gender roles that put girls and women at a disadvantage or circumstances within the classroom that might promote or inhibit gender equality are of particular interest to Mary. In particular, you see Mary commenting on the theme raised by female students in the class that they were unable to act in certain ways or participate in activities because they were girls. According to Mary, the sexist attitudes and behaviors of parents and other family members that restricted the expression and participation of girls served to recreate gender bias and discrimination. Mary points out the many comments by students that support her liberal feminist perspective. In contrast, one female student, Bethany, comments that she was raised to believe that “girls can do anything boys can do.” Although Mary acknowledges this comment, she also takes the opportunity to remind the audience that Bethany’s experience is uncommon given the pervasive sexist and discriminatory beliefs and practices of this society. What Maria shares later in the discussion underscores this point as she described her struggles with not conforming to the expectations placed upon her as a girl and woman. For Mary, this is further evidence of the disproportionate impact on girls and women of gender roles and the burden of not living up to societal expectations of what a girl or woman “should” be and do. As the scenes progress, it is my hope that you are beginning to see how the stories of this instructor, these students, the researcher and our three commentary providers, Judith, Alice and Mary, unfold and interact with each other as the class sessions continue. As we explore together what is taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course, 92 insights and interrogations of the content, the teacher moves and the student moves abound! I can’t wait to see what comes next! Scene 3: Stereotyping – Guiding Questions You are about to see the second activity of the day facilitated by the instructor. Watching it provides us another opportunity to examine the interactions between the students and the instructor, as well as the interactions between students. Throughout the scene, Alice, Mary, and Judith will continue to provide commentaries from their unique, yet complementary perspectives, Womanism, Liberal Feminism and Postmodern Feminism respectively. They encourage us to look at specific interactions as well as take time to reflect upon the choice the instructor makes to include this particular activity and her facilitation of it. The following questions are here to help you keep your eye out for the ways in which gender and education are being taught specifically within this scene. Womanism (Alice) 1. Why do you think the instructor chooses the two students she does to help her write on the white board? Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 1. What do you make of the interaction around the suggestion of the term immature for boys? 2. What do you think are the benefits and/or hindrances of disclosing to students ahead of time the format that they will be invited to share what they have written? Liberal Feminism (Mary) 1. What are the benefits of discussing gender stereotypes? 93 2. Why do you think that two of the men were cupping their hands around their mouths as they shout their comments during the stereotypes activity? Scene 3: Stereotyping – Script [Imani is looking down at her notes behind the computer podium] 1. Imani: Umm, there’s one more activity I wanna do before we segue into the readings, and you can use the same sheet of paper, or you can d- use a different sheet. [clearing of throat] But I want you to write down words used to describe these categories. [writes Girl, Woman, Boy, Man and draws four columns on white board] [Students getting ready to write] 2. Imani: Just different words when you think of these terms, what are different words used to describe these categories [Quiet while students were writing. Imani walks around at the front of the room, gathers some handouts] 3. Imani: First things that come to your mind [Quiet while students were writing] 4. Imani: First things that come to your mind [Quiet while students were writing. Imani puts something on her lips (moisturizer?). Summer sneezes] 5. Imani: Bless you, [Summer sneezes again] bless you [Quiet while students were writing] 6. Imani: Take about 30 more seconds [Quiet while students were writing. Imani motions to Tonya and Nikki to come up to the white board to help write student responses] 94 7. Alice: [aside] Did you notice how the instructor just chose the two Black women seated close to her to help her write the other students’ responses on the white board? Here is another opportunity for students situated closer to the instructor to be more involved in the class. As a result of their seat selection, Tonya and Nikki have enhanced their engagement with the instructor, the class, and the course content. Being asked to scribe for the instructor and the class, these women have the opportunity to be more attentive and involved in the learning process. The selection of these two students by the instructor also provides us insight into the relationships that the instructor has developed with her students, and in this case specifically with these two Black women. Being seated closer to the instructor appears to enable these students to be selected by the instructor for this kind of support/leadership role in the classroom. It also allows them access to a greater level of involvement and interaction with the instructor, developing rapport and giving them the chance to interact on a more casual level with the instructor. All of these points could factor into these students’ motivation for sitting closer to the instructor. 8. Imani: Alright, let’s get some responses. Girl, what are some terms that come to mind? [Rachel raises her hand while other students begin to call out responses. Imani writes the responses while Nikki and Tonya stand by to help] 9. Stacey: Pink 10. Cheryl: Innocent 11. Imani: Pink 12. Rhonda: Prissy 13. Imani: Hold on, Innocent. 14. Terrance: Mature 95 15. Imani: What was that? 16. Terrance: Mature 17. Imani: Mature? 18. Bethany: Dresses 19. Imani: Dresses. Alright, let’s just get a few for… 20. Aisha: Fast 21. Imani: What? 22. Aisha: Fast 23. Imani: Fast? Mmm hmm 24. Alice: [aside] Imani responds to Aisha’s contribution of the word “fast” as a descriptor for girls by clarifying her statement and then agreeing with it. This is the first time that a term shouted out by a student that has elicited an evaluative response from the instructor. I would argue that this demonstrates another point of connection between an African American woman student and the instructor. Because her response indicates that she agrees with the suggested term, it again conveys that there is a common understanding that is shared between this student and the instructor. [Student laughter] 25. Rasheena: [Jokingly to Aisha] Hot 26. Aisha: Spoiled 27. Imani: Spoiled 28. Laura: Fanciful 29. Rhonda: Giggles 30. Cheryl: Adorable 96 31. Christopher: Sandals 32. Rhonda: Fanciful 33. Kelli: [Directed at Christopher] Sandals? 34. Imani: Fanciful 35. Ashlee: Brat 36. Cheryl: Sandals 37. Bethany: Princess 38. Marcus: Reserved [Indistinguishable conversations between instructor and student helper(s) writing and other student-student conversations] 39. Summer: Barbies 40. Imani: What? 41. Cheryl: He said sandals, like shoes. 42. Christopher: [Talking at and motioning to Cheryl] Fanciful’s a much better word 43. Imani: Somebody said another word. 44. Marcus: Reserved 45. Rhonda: Giggly 46. Imani: Giggly and reserved. [Terms now written under the category of girl include: pink, innocent, prissy, mature, dresses, fast, spoiled, fanciful, brats, giggly and reserved] 47. Imani: Ok. Let’s kind of stop our, stop our list there. Umm, what about boy? 48. Aisha: Bad 97 [Indistinguishable shouting of terms overlapping each other. Nikki begins to write the terms on the white board. Imani has stepped to the side to continue to facilitate the activity] 49. Timothy: Video games 50. Rachel: Rough 51. Peter: Mischevious 52. Nikki: Boring 53. Imani: Ok, wait a minute! She can’t write that fast! Bad 54. Rachel: Rough 55. Imani: Buff 56. Bethany: Hyper 57. Rasheena: Aggressive 58. Timothy: Dirty 59. Christopher: Sneakers 60. Laura: Curious 61. Nikki: Y’all goin’ to fast [Imani walks over to the white board and gets ready to write] 62. Timothy: Dirty 63. Rachel: Rough 64. Rasheena: Aggressive 65. Aisha: Aggressive 66. Rachel: Rough 67. Nikki: I can’t spell 98 68. Rachel: Rough? 69. Imani: [Taking over the writing of terms on the white board] Rough. Y’all too slow [Student laughter. Nikki puts the cap on the marker she was using and places it on the computer podium and takes her seat. Tonya is still standing next to the white board as Imani continues to write] 70. Imani: Aggressive 71. Bethany: Hyper 72. Imani: Hyper 73. Laura: Curious 74. Timothy: Dirty 75. Monica: Messy 76. Rhonda: Tough 77. Rachel: Mischievous 78. Christopher: Baseball 79. Rasheena: Football [Tonya puts her marker down on the computer podium and returns to her seat] 80. Terrance: Can the dudes be, uh, mature? [Student laughter and ‘no’s’ and ‘not’s’ as well as responses of ‘immature’] 81. Imani: Immature. [Terms now written under the category of boy include: bad, video game, rough, aggressive, hyper, dirty, sports, mischievous, and immature] 82. Judith: [aside] Here we see the powerful use of instructor authority to contradict this student’s suggested response (albeit somewhat in jest). Terrance asks “can the dudes be, 99 uh, mature?” after several suggested terms for the category “boy.” Perhaps he felt personally threatened by some of the suggestions, “messy,” “mischievous,” “aggressive,” and “hyper.” And, after having offered the term “mature” for the category “girls” maybe he felt that there needed to be some balance between the two lists? There is no way to be certain without having the opportunity to talk with Terrance about his thoughts and feelings related to this activity. However, the reactions from the other students and the instructor clearly shut down, and even reverse his suggestion of “mature” by turning it into “immature” which the instructor picks up on and includes in the list of terms for the category of “boy.” Within an activity on stereotypes, Terrance appears to be attempting to resist the stereotypical depictions of boys as immature, which is quickly overruled by the vocal majority of the classroom, as well as the instructor who holds the power (as well as the marker) to override (and rewrite) the suggestion. 83. Imani: Alright, what about man? 84. Timothy: Hairy 85. Cheryl: Provider 86. Aisha: Strong 87. Stacey: Brave 88. Nikki: Provider, Protector 89. Ashlee: Macho 90. Cheryl: Strong 91. Aisha: Married 92. Rasheena: Money for the household. [Quieter, more to herself] Oh, that’s provider, I guess. [Tonya laughs] 100 93. Timothy: Beast 94. Ashlee: Beast? 95. Imani: What? Provider, protector 96. Timothy: [Cupping hands around mouth] Beast 97. Rasheena: Football 98. Timothy: [Still cupping hands around mouth] Beast-mon 99. Rasheena: Success 100. Terrance: Hard-working 101. Christopher: [With hands around his mouth] Cars 102. Imani: Cars? 103. Monica: The head of the household 104. Cheryl: Responsible 105. Terrance: Yeah, yeah, responsible 106. Imani: Ok, responsible 107. Aisha: Money [Terms now written under the category of man include: provider, strong, protector, brave, success, cars, responsible and $] 108. Judith: [aside] Notice the response patterns offered by some of the men. In two cases, the men are shouting their responses quite loudly, even cupping their hands around their mouths to project more. Both Christopher and Timothy use their hands cupped around their mouths to project their responses louder and position them as elevated (at least volumewise) above what else is being offered by their classmates. In addition, the last two comments from Terrance characterizing men as “hardworking” and agreeing with Cheryl’s 101 suggestion of the term “responsible” could be seen as power moves in response to being overridden by the instructor (and other students) on the suggestion of mature as a characteristic of boys. Terrance appears to be persistent in his attempts to create an image of boys and men as positive contributors to society. It is interesting and important to take note of these particular interactions among and between the students and the instructor. It is here that we can see nuanced and context-specific performances of gender. 109. Mary: [aside] Agreed. That Timothy and Christopher are acting in ways that both enable them and their voices to stand out and rise above the rest cannot be overlooked. And, observing Terrance’s persistence in painting a picture of boys and men as mature, responsible and hardworking is further evidence of the pervasiveness of sexism and male dominance, even in this classroom. These men, although a significant minority numberwise within this classroom, continue to make their presence known loudly and consistently. 110. Imani: And what about, woman? 111. Ashlee: Confident 112. Stacey: Jewelry [Student laughter] 113. Rasheena: Classy 114. Imani: [laughing as she writes jewelry] Alright 115. Christopher: Sexy 116. Nikki: Independent 117. Timothy: Cooking 118. Laura: Kept up 119. Christopher: [putting his hands up beside his mouth] Macy’s 102 120. Nikki: Clean in the kitchen 121. Aisha: Strong 122. Ashlee: Con-fi-dent 123. Imani: Did somebody say Macy’s? [Student and instructor laughter] 124. Bethany: Nieman Marcus 125. Aisha: Married 126. Summer: Homemaker 127. Aisha: Married 128. Rhonda: Well-kept 129. Imani: Homemaker 130. Rachel: Mother 131. Nikki: Childbearing, yeah 132. Imani: Ok 133. Timothy: Betty Crocker 134. Bethany: Caregiver 135. Aisha: Yeah 136. Cheryl: Strong 137. Aisha: Caregiver 138. Ashlee: Confident 139. Aisha: Degree 140. Rhonda: Well-kept 141. Stacey: High heels 103 [Terms now written under the category of woman include: jewelry, classy, independent, married, home maker, child bearer, confident, and high heels] 142. Imani: Ok, and so our list goes on and on. 143. Summer: Oh! 144. Imani: Now, I just want you to reflect for just a minute on these different terms, ok? Things you see up there, etc. [pause] Why do we think of these things when we 145. Stacey: Stereotypes 146. Imani: Think of these roles? Who said it? Yeah, Stacey said it, I mean, these are stereotypes. These are our expectations for how people in these categories should perform, should act, right? Umm, what you all have stated are probably reflective of the larger society. Umm, there are some other terms that I’m surprised not in… 147. Stacey: What? 148. Aisha: What? 149. Imani: I mean I’m just surprised we didn’t name many adjectives. [Multiple mostly indistinguishable student comments audible responses include “Like what?” and “Which ones?”] 150. Tonya: Boys would have to get freaky 151. Imani: Oh, that’s right [Student and instructor laughter] 152. Imani: Umm, so, I mean, that’s why I put these dot-dot-dots, right? There could be all kinds of terms. But again, this notion of, we expect people to fit into these boxes and perform these roles, right? [Imani shuts down projection system and begins to walk to the white board at the front right side of the room] These are socially constructed. Nobody, th- 104 those aren’t biological. Girls aren’t biologically spoiled. You could have a boy that’s spoiled. I mean, how do we come to create these norms? 153. Judith: [aside] Indeed, “girls aren’t biologically spoiled.” And, as Imani articulately presents, “these are socially constructed” within individual interactions situated in social, political and historical contexts of power and language. In fact, this whole activity could be seen as a performance within the binary system of gender. Based on the columns the instructor drew of the white board prior to asking students to write their lists of terms, students could conclude that they would be sharing their lists with each other in some public way. This knowledge, in and of itself, could have impacted the way students would be willing, or not, to be honest about what comes to mind to describe the categories. 154. Mary: [aside] This is a powerful activity to demonstrate the pervasive and constricting stereotypes that girls and women face every day. As Imani states, “These are our expectations for how people in these categories should perform, should act.” And, the picture that is painted for girls and women is one that not only dictates how they should act, but also diminishes their strength and power. Of all 19 the terms written to describe girls and women, only three connote positive characteristics (mature, independent and confident). Beyond those, there are a host of words that describe girls and women as spoiled, giggly, child bearing, home makers who wear high heels. Certainly not the picture painted of boys and men as strong, sports and video game playing, brave and responsible protectors and providers. A glaring look at the distinct ways that girls and women live in unfair and unequal worlds compared to boys and men. 155. Alice: [aside] It is certainly powerful and important to discuss the gender stereotypes that pervade the experiences of children and adults in our society today. Understanding the 105 social construction of identity characteristics and the distinct experiences of individuals and groups based on their multiple identities can help us not only to understand the way things are today, but also links to the historical and political contexts of society. I would have loved to hear, however, the impacts of these stereotypes on the students in the class, as well as the instructor. How have their lives benefited from or been constrained by these stereotypes. And, how have their racial and social class identities intersected with these gender stereotypes? These questions remain unanswered. Perhaps in the activities to come we will explore these interrelationships more deeply. Scene 3: Stereotyping – Reflections A discussion of stereotypes here that allows us to see gender bias, the intersections of race, gender and other identity characteristics, and the complexity of gendered performances within particular contexts and interactions. And, we continue to see the ways in which the three theoretical perspectives are distinct from each other and yet overlapping in some ways. Let’s look a little more closely at the observations of Alice, Mary, and Judith. As Alice points out, the instructor continues to interact with the black women in the class in ways that foreground her own identity as a black woman. The interactions are causal and integrated within the happenings of the classroom in an organic way. Therefore, the intersections of race, class and gender are a part of the fabric of the class periods rather than a part of the explicit content brought to the foreground by the instructor. For example, Imani invites to of the African American women seated more closely to her at the front of the room to support her in writing the brainstormed terms on the white board. For Mary, this activity, both in content and classroom dynamic, is yet another display of the way gender bias and discrimination are pervasive in today’s classrooms and society more 106 broadly. Noting the participation of the male students in the classroom, Mary contends that their behavior during the activity can be further evidence of the sexist and discriminatory nature of schooling and society more broadly. And so, in this scene we see an activity that both raises content about as well as evokes gender bias within the educational setting. Judith reminds us that specific interactions between the instructor and the students, as well as among the students, show us gendered power relations that both promote and challenge the seemingly stable binary system of gender. The instructor chose to focus the attention of the students on the categories typically associated with the binary system of gender (boy, girl, woman and man). In setting up the activity, students self-selected what they would share from their lists, and even what they would include in the lists in the first place. As a result, the entire activity could have been seen as a performance of gender, participating in recreating and/or deconstructing the gender norms in the ways that students chose to engage in the activity. Judith’s postmodern feminist perspective evokes an interrogation of the ways gender is performed within this classroom. In this scene in particular, looking at the ways that two of the men used their hands cupped around their mouths to shout their additions to the lists of stereotypes was quite striking. Additionally, the interactions between Terrance and Imani provide us specific instances where gendered power relations play out in this class session. Terrance advocates for the term “mature” to be written up for the category of “boy” after several additions to the list that could have been perceived as negative characterizations of boys. Perhaps Terrance felt threatened by these descriptions? It is clear that this is not a popular suggestion by the responses of the other students, and especially by the instructor who ultimately chooses the antonym “immature” to write on the white board. This, according to Judith, becomes a demonstration of the instructor’s use of power to overrule and in somewhat of a 107 joking way to turn what Terrance said around and choose to record the opposite of his suggestion. Further, Judith highlights Terrance’s next comment in response to another student’s offering of “responsible” as a descriptor for the category “men” shows his continued performance in defense of boys and men (and likely his own masculinity). Overall, we are beginning to see an expansive and nuanced picture being painted by our observations of this course and this class session focused on the topic of gender. We can look into the interactions, comments, questions, and activities through a multiplicity of lenses. The commentaries offered by Judith sharing the postmodern feminist perspective, Mary speaking from the liberal feminist perspective and Alice bringing to life the womanist perspective show us the complexity and intricacy of what is being taught about gender and education within this multicultural education course. And, with the support of these viewpoints and theorists, we continue to see the ways that gender bias and discrimination are brought to life both within and beyond this classroom through the eyes of Mary, how the gender binary is interrogated and challenged as gender is performed in varied and contextualized relations of power (Judith), as well as Alice’s perspective centering on the benefits of integrating narratives and personal life experiences of these students and the instructor as gendered and racialized (among other identity characteristics). Let’s get back to class to see what’s next… Scene 4: Sex/Gender – Guiding Questions In the next scene, following the previous two reflection writing and sharing activities, the instructor engages the students in a short lecture providing them with content knowledge about terminology. Again, the content of this section, the relationships between the students and the instructor, as well as between the students and each other, come alive as sites of interrogation from various perspectives. Mary, Judith and Alice continue to ask thought-provoking questions 108 and make astute observations through their distinct viewpoints that urge us to examine how this section of the class period uniquely raises concepts and discourses of gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course. Below are the guiding questions related to each of the three women aligned with their unique theoretical perspective. Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 1. What are the benefits of discussing the distinctions between sex and gender? 2. Why do you think that students were quick to confuse the discussion of sex and gender with issues of sexuality and sexual orientation? 3. What are the benefits of discussing the terminology related to gender and sex with teacher candidates? Liberal Feminism (Mary) 1. What do you make of the interaction between the student who reiterated what the other student had already said? Womanism (Alice) 1. What are these students’ experiences related to sex, gender and other identity characteristics? Scene 4: Sex/Gender – Script [Imani moves white board from front right to center of the room covering the area where the projector shines for the next activity] 1. Imani: So, with that, let’s move into a discussion before we go into the readings of the difference between sex and gender. 2. Imani: [aside] Starting this semester I am doing this lecture to help students break out and understand the terms sex and gender and how gender roles are related to the two boxes. I 109 often will do mini-lectures like this because I wanna make sure there are certain terms or concepts that the student get in case they didn’t get them through the reading or are confused by any of it. 3. Researcher: [aside] Cool! I introduced Imani to this activity that I do in my classes when I teach this course. I call it my “Sex/Gender Mini-Lecture,” and this year at the instructor orientation I did a presentation to the instructor group showing how/why I use it in my teaching. I feel that it is very important to delineate for students the distinctions between sex and gender. Often in our society people conflate the terms referring to the terms male and female as universal for both sex and gender. I’m eager to see how Imani will teach this lesson. 4. Imani: Now based on what you read, does anyone have a sense of how those are different, those two terms: sex, not the act of sex, sex as a noun [Student laughter and side comments/conversation] 5. Imani: Sex as a noun [Continued student laughter. Imani writes “Sex” and “Gender” on the white board] 6. Imani: [Hands raised: Cheryl, Rasheena, Monica, Terrance] Not having sex, but sex [laugh] and gender. Who raised their… [trailing off, indistinguishable] Rasheena, ok [Nikki gets up and puts attendance sheet on front table] 7. Rasheena: One is more of a biological thing, like, how you’re born. And the other one is like, I don’t know, like how you was sayin’ how you choose to perform, like, say if, I don’t know, like, you can, let’s just say a homosexual, they were born probably a girl, but then they choose to take on the gender of a female, but their sex is a male. 110 8. Imani: Ok, yes I do see what you’re saying. I, the example is a little off, but that’s ok, we’ll come back to that on Thursday. Umm [laugh], cuz you mixed some things there [Hands raised: Monica & Terrance] 9. Rasheena: Oh 10. Imani: [Begins to write on the white board part way into this next comment] So you started talking about homosexuality within sex in ways that I think need to be teased out a little, but you’re on the right track in terms of typically sex is defined as biological, ok? It is, it’s it’s defined as biological, where gender, gender roles, etc., is socially constructed, ok? It is not s- 11. Tonya: [matter of fact] Everything is socially constructed [to which Aisha laughs] [Terrance’s hand is still raised] 12. Imani: Yes, everything is socially construc-, it is not s-, yes, you have a question, or? 13. Terrance: No, no, I was gonna [Monica raises her hand again and lowers it immediately] 14. Imani: Addition? 15. Terrance: Yeah 16. Imani: [facing Terrance] Ok 17. Terrance: I was gonna say, you know, sex is biological, male or female, and gender is, you know, how you’re supposed to act with that sex [Nikki makes a comment about Terrance saying the same thing Rasheena had already said, motioning at Rasheena with her pen in her hand. Rasheena, already turned around listening to his comment, motions/says toward Terrance something along the lines of “that’s what I just said”] 111 18. Imani: Mmm hmm, yeah, similar to what Rasheena said 19. Terrance: Oh really? [Student and instructor laughter, comments, and side conversations] 20. Imani: Yes. But that’s good, Terrance, you, you kind of just reiterated it for us. Ok. [Continued laughter/side conversations along with indistinguishable response by Terrance] 21. Mary: [aside] Did you notice how Terrance restated what Rasheena has already said? Even after Imani clarified whether or not it was an addition to what had been shared, Terrance continued with his repetitive summary of the difference between sex and gender. This is yet another example of how sexism plays out in society and within this classroom. All too often, men reiterate what a woman has already said. Whether this man was not listening initially to the woman who already offered the same response, or if it was that he felt the need to rephrase it, this is a clear example of how patterns of communication between men and women are diminishing of women’s contributions. 22. Imani: So, Terrance did kind of explicate for us a little better. What are the sexes that we, we know? [Student responses called out over each other – audible responses include male, transgender, transsexual, and homosexual. Imani writes male and female under the term sex on the white board] 23. Imani: [Still writing] Ok, actually those are not sexes. [Turns around to face the class] Homosexual is not a sex category. 24. Marcus: [Among multiple inaudible comments/responses] That’s a sexual orientation. 25. Christopher: Shhh, shhh, shhh, shhh 112 26. Imani: [Talking over multiple overlapping student comments] Transgender is not a sex category. 27. Monica: And gender would be… 28. Cheryl: What about, uh 29. Terrance: Um, intersexual 30. Imani: [Still talking over student comments] Male, shhh 31. Terrance: It’s intersex 32. Imani: male is usually defined by what characteristics? [Indistinguishable student responses, audible responses saying penis by multiple students including Marcus] 33. Imani: You’re born with a penis. [student laughter] Female [Inaudible student responses] 34. Imani: Vagina. Now there are s-, there are several people, lots of people in the world who are born with both, right, or it’s not easily identifiable, and I think I heard Terrance say the correct term, which is intersex. [writes intersex under male and female] Ok, that is a biological term, right? Everybody is not born easily identified as having a penis or vagina, right? You may not know it, that, you could have gone to school with people, umm, who were born with both types of sex organs. The challenge is they are forced into a gend-, to choose a gender, ok? [Rasheena raises her hand and then speaks without being called on] 35. Rasheena: That’s what I was gonna ask 113 36. Nikki: [Speaks without raising her hand] So just because you born with both does that m-, necessarily mean like that you got the same… [trailing off, indistinguishable – possibly ‘emotions’ was one of the last words] 37. Terrance: No 38. Imani: Well, just because you’re born as [Summer sneezes] bless you, identified as male, uh, doesn’t mean that you’re gonna have certain types of emotions, right? Some men are very effeminate. That doesn’t mean they’re gay, they’re just very effeminate men. Some female are very [uses air quotes] masculine. That doesn’t mean that they’re gay. They just are more masculine, right? Think again about your own identity, umm, and whether you like to be girly girlish or not, right? But does that make you, does that have anything to do, do with your sexual preferences or sexual orientation, maybe not? But, again, this is how we box people in. [Looks at her notes again] So as I continue the diagram, then the gender role typically associated with a male is man, right? [Draws an arrow from the term male and writes man and boy next to it under the term gender] And, of course, before you become a man, you’re a boy, alright? [Pause to look at her notes on the table behind her] With female the gender role is what? [Draws an arrow from the term female] [Student responses – audible response: woman and girl] 39. Imani: [As she writes woman and girl under man and boy] Uh, woman and girl, ok? [Looks back at notes again. As she continues the next part of the lecture, Cheryl gets up and walks around the back of the classroom and out the door] Male-s are expected to act out masculinity, which is socially constructed to look a certain way. [Draws an arrow from male to under woman and girl and writes masculinity] There is a certain way to be masculine. 114 [Indistinguishable comment by Terrance that is laughed at by Timothy] 40. Imani: Alright? And, females are expected to display femininity. [Draws an arrow from female to under masculinity and writes femininity] Ok? Everybody following me? [Looks back at notes on table. Several students look up at the door because of the noise it makes closing after Cheryl leaves] 41. Marcus: Mmm hmm 42. Imani: [Continues without looking up. During this line she gets an eraser from the other white board and erases intersex and writes it again lower on the white board] Where we have trouble is with intersex individuals, because, many of you may or may not know, but again, at birth, when kids are born with both sets of, umm, s- uh sex organs or either not easily identifiable, hospitals typically make you choose 43. Terrance: Mmm, hmm 44. Imani: They make, make the parents [Summer raises her hand] 45. Nikki: [Speaks without raising her hand] What you want your kid to be? 46. Aisha: [In response to Nikki] Yeah 47. Imani: They make the parents choose 48. Terrance: Yes 49. Nikki: So, that’s what I’m asking. Wouldn’t you be like, ok I want my kid to be a boy, and they got both or whatever, and then you cut off the [Overlapping student comments/conversation from Terrance and others] 50. Imani: I mean, it, that, so that’s the whole point, parents are forced to choose. You don’t really know what your 115 51. Nikki: [Overlapping] Why can’t you let your kid choose? 52. Imani: Well the baby can’t choose [Student and instructor laughter and loud side conversations and response by Nikki motioning with her hand saying something about when the children get older] 53. Imani: Well, I mean but hospitals don’t do that 54. Aisha: [Overlapping] They make you choose 55. Imani: [Continues speaking over student comments/conversations] And I’m asking 56. Aisha: [Still overlapping] They make you 57. Christopher: Shhh, shhh, shhh, shhh [Cheryl comes back into the room with a handful of napkins. Several students look up and at her as she reenters. Summer has continued to hold her hand up throughout all of this dialogue waiting to be called on. Terrance also raises his hand during the instructor’s next line.] 58. Imani: What I’m trying to get you all to see is this whole notion of we force, in our society, we force people to be one or the other, right? And so parents have to, umm, they have to make a choice. Summer. [As Summer begins to speak, Imani walks over to look at her lecture notes again] 59. Summer: Umm, in my psychology class last year we read about this experiment called Joan/John. 60. Imani: Mmm hmm [Terrance lowers his had, but not all the way, he is still poised to raise it again. Imani turns toward the white board and draws an open parentheses mark next to the term intersex and then turns toward Summer listening with her left hand on her hip] 116 61. Summer: And, um, they’re, there’s, uh, it was a set of twins and it was two boys, and the, when they were, umm, somehow, I think it was somehow one of the boy’s penis got, like, cauterized 62. Imani: Mmm hmm 63. Summer: And so they were like, ok, you know what, just take the whole thing off and they raised him as a girl 64. Imani: Mmm hmm 65. Summer: And then they told them and, like, it was just really interesting because it was like, you know, he was unhappy all of his life because he was, like, a girl, but really he had the characteristics of a boy, like 66. Imani: His physical characteristics 67. Summer: Right, right 68. Imani: But his, kind of, emotions and 69. Summer: Yup 70. Imani: Sensitivities [Terrance raises his hand more fully again] 71. Summer: Just like that 72. Imani: Were more, mmm hmm 73. Summer: And then 74. Nikki: [Speaks without raising her hand] They did something like that on “Law and Order” [Lots of student comments/side conversations] 75. Imani: And Lifetime…[indistinguishable because of student comments/side conversations] [Terrance’s hand is still raised. Imani moves on without calling on him] 117 76. Imani: [Talking over student comments/side conversations and turning back to write on the white board writing the term hermaphrodite next to the parentheses mark she just drew and then closes the parentheses] What I want to say, some of you may be familiar with the term hermaphrodite? No? Yeah? [Varied student responses. Terrance finally lowers his hand as the instructor begins the next line. 77. Imani: Ok, that, that’s the old term for intersex. [Draws and “x” through the term hermaphrodite and then turns toward the class] So you don’t use that term anymore. You don’t call individuals who have both sex organs hermaphrodites, ok? Umm, but that used to be the terminology, so I just kinda wanted to put that out there so people know it’s more appropriate to say that person is intersex, alright? And again, these cases are not, umm, frequent, but it is very real. There are human beings born in this way in our country all the time, I, I was talking with a grad student who has a relative who is intersex, so, you never know, there may be kids in your classroom, umm, who have experienced this, and, again, it’s the whole being forced to choose even though your s-, and, and why do we do that, right? We put people, push people into these socially constructed boxes. [Looks back at notes again and then draws an arrow next to the term hermaphrodite toward the right] Now I want to finish my diagram by looking at another gender categor-, usually we only think of gender as man, woman, boy, or girl, but someone did holler out transgender. [Turns and writes transgender on the white board underneath the term femininity next to the arrow she just drew] That is a gender category. [Turns back toward the class] And, really, a transgendered person is a person who does not feel like they fit into these boxes [pointing at the other terms written under the category gender] very clearly, right? They don’t have to 118 be homosexual, they just sa-, they don’t subscribe to the typical male roles [air quotes] and female roles [air quotes], so they identify as transgender. You following me? Sometimes we think, oh a transgendered person is a gay person or a homose-, no it’s, it could be a person that simply says, “I don’t subscribe to the way society has defined these two categories [again pointing at the white board] and so I choose to identify myself as transgendered.” [Aisha and Marcus have raised their hands. Imani motions toward Aisha for her to speak and then picks up her notebook of notes and holds it in her arm as she responds to Aisha] 78. Aisha: Would that be a example of a stay at home dad, or no? 79. Imani: Sure 80. Aisha: Ok [Marcus raises his hand again during the instructor’s next line] 81. Imani: If he wanted to identify in that way, yes, because that is not the norm [uses air quotes] for the father to be the stay at home parent, ok? Yes, Marcus [Imani turns back toward the white board as Marcus begins to speak and underlines the word transgender and then looks back briefly at Marcus] 82. Marcus: I just wanted to no- the, note the socially constructedness of, uh, that because you said, uh, man roles [said firmly with air quotes] or woman roles [said softly with air quotes], you said it lightly, I don’t know…[trailing off, indistinguishable] [Student laughter. Imani points to the words “socially constructed” on the white board as she begins to speak and then turns toward Marcus holding her notebook in her right hand as she speaks. Student side conversations begin] 119 83. Imani: Because I’m trying to keep reiterating it’s socially constructed, right? Who, who gets to define the characteristics of a man and of a woman, right? And people who don’t fit that then have to be outside the box. So the reason I drew this arrow here [points to the arrow drawn between intersex and transgender] is because an intersex person would most likely be in this category [points to the term transgender], simply because of their biological makeup they don’t fit neatly into the other two, you following me? 84. Judith: [aside] The students appear to be interested, informed and engaged with this discussion that complexifies the discussion of gender, sex, and sexuality. There is, however, some confusion on the part of the students and the instructor about the relationships between sex, gender, and sexuality. The students frequently include language related to sexual orientation (specifically homosexuality) within the discussion of gender and sex. They also suggested terms like homosexual, transgender and transsexual in response to Imani’s request for students to help her list out sex categories. The instructor reiterates several times that homosexuality is not a sex or gender category and that transcending the gender norms doesn’t necessarily mean that you are gay as a result of some of these confusions. However, Imani also confuses some of the terminology related to sex and gender herself when she says that an intersex person would most likely identify as transgender. These types of confusions and conflations are understandable given the general lack of understanding and discourse surrounding these topics within multicultural teacher education, or even within teacher education more broadly. It is notable that this instructor has even included this discussion within the short time frame that gender is the topic of discussion within her course. 120 [Cheryl had raised her hand and played with her hair a bit and then re-raised her and slightly as the instructor came to the end of the last line. Imani moves on without calling on her] 85. Imani: [As she begins to speak, Imani turns and writes on the white board several terms under transgender: transsexual, gender queer, drag and cross dresser] Ok. Now, under transgendered there are lots of different terms that you may be familiar with, ok? And, again, this is to educate you all on the diff-, different types of ways that people can identify. So all these categories fall under transgender. [Facing students, she moves her notebook to her left hand and points with her right hand at the terms as she says them] If you are transsexual. What is a transsexual? 86. Terrance: [Speaks without raising his hand or being called on] A person that changed their sex from one to the other. 87. Imani: They have actually had the 88. Terrance: [overlapping] surgery…[indistinguishable] 89. Imani: surgery, yes, ok, to change their sex organs, umm, ok? That’s a transsexual. That’s different. They fall under the transgender category, but this person has actually had the sex change. Gender queer is, again, someone who is saying, “I don’t necessarily fit under man or woman, I identify myself as gender queer.” Queer meaning, umm, resisting those norms again. “I’m gender queer.” Again, doesn’t have to mean they’re gay, right? We, sometimes we associate these things with being non-heterosexual. What is a person who dresses, who, what is a drag person, drag queen [Inaudible student responses] 121 90. Imani: Mmm hmm, dresses in the opposite gender. Similar to, o-, and not just dresses, a cross dresser dresses in the opposite gender, but a person who identifies as dra-, really lives that opposite gender on a daily basis, ok? [Puts notebook back on table and walks to the other side of the white board] So, I just wanted to kind of do this so you could put it in your notes, and get a sense again, w-, w-, what does, what meaning do we make of all this? So, what’s this have to do with schools? 91. Marcus: Mmm hmm 92. Mary: [aside] I’m really glad she is asking this question to prompt students to think about the relationship between this knowledge about the distinctions between sex and gender and what goes on in schools and society more broadly. It is important to bring the discussion back to an understanding and application of how increased knowledge about the nature (or lack thereof) of gender roles. As these students become more familiar with the restrictions placed upon women as they are compelled to adhere to standards of femininity simply because they are born female, they can be empowered to support the prevention and elimination of sexism and gender bias and discrimination within schools and society. 93. Imani: What, what does this have to do with school? And kids? [Marcus raises his hand and lowers it when Rasheena begins speaking without being called on] 94. Rasheena: That’s why kids, they don’t know…[trailing off, indistinguishable] I don’t know, it’s like some kids probably goin’ through this stuff and we just don’t realize cuz they don’t wanna be gay or things like that, and so 95. Imani: [Standing behind computer podium] Mmm hmm, mmm hmm. [Hands raised: Marcus, Peter, Cheryl] Yes, Peter 122 96. Peter: There, umm, I didn’t send this [indistinguishable] there was a news article that said there’s a high school outside New York or something 97. Imani: Ok 98. Peter: That is, umm, umm, being positive gay 99. Imani: Hmm 100. Peter: Is, is there’s something like they’re, the homosexual, umm, I can’t remember the exact term they labeled it as. Not that they’re promoting it, but that because so many kids were skipping school and afraid to go to school because of it 101. Imani: Mmm hmm 102. Peter: That now they’re, they’re, umm 103. Imani: Interesting 104. Peter: Creating a separate school 105. Jane: [To Peter] Was it in the New York…[trailing off indistinguishable] 106. Rasheena: [To Peter] Oh yeah, I heard that 107. Imani: Oh really? 108. Jane: [To Peter] Was it in the New York Times? 109. Imani: If you pull it back up, send it to me. That would be relevant, particularly for Thursday. [Hands raised: Cheryl, Nikki] Cheryl. 110. Cheryl: I was gonna say it’s important for us to know this so that, like, classroom dynamics, umm 111. Imani: [Listening with her right hand on her hip] Mmm hmm 123 112. Cheryl: If people are using, if people, like if young kids, you hear all the time, like, [indistinguishable] gay, or if a guy came in wearing, like, a pink shirt or somethin’, they’d be like, you’re gay or somethin’ like that 113. Imani: Mmm hmm 114. Cheryl: And so it’s good to know the actual definitions of, like, the actual, like, what does that mean 115. Imani: Mmm hmm 116. Cheryl: So that you can correct students who may need…[trailing off, indistinguishable] [Rhonda raises her hand. Imani calls on Nikki even though her hand is not still raised] 117. Imani: [Overlapping Cheryl] Mmm hmm, yup, definitely. Nikki, did you wanna add? [Crosses her arms] 118. Nikki: Oh, I was, umm gonna pick back up on what Peter said, I know the school, this school had something, it was in Wi-, Wilson hall? It was National Coming Out Day or something. [Marcus has raised his hand] 119. Imani: Ok, ok [A few indistinguishable student side conversations including comments about “LGBT” (Cheryl?) and “lesbian, gay, trans…” (Terrance)] 120. Imani: So, again, you all are referring back to homosexuality, which is fine, but I want us to stay kinda in these gender roles, and, and this notion of, uh, performance and etc. and what this means for schools, and children in schools. [Hands raised: Marcus (never lowered), Bethany, Rhonda, Monica] Yeah, go ahead Bethany 124 121. Bethany: I think especially in a elementary school, it’s important as like teachers not to separate your students, and to let the, like, allow boys to play in like the home living area, and allow girls to go play soccer and stuff with the boys, and allow them to interact with each other as equals versus, “girls get to go play with the girls over here with dolls” 122. Imani: [Listening with her arms crossed] Right 123. Bethany: And, “boys need to go outside and run around” 124. Imani: Exactly 125. Bethany: So, just like promoting them to cross 126. Imani: Mmm hmm, mmm hmm 127. Bethany: Like, the lines 128. Imani: The lines, exactly, promoting that. Promoting that, and then, as Cheryl said, correcting kids around their language, you know, cuz a lot of it is misunderstanding, and just saying, “Hey, let’s talk about this” or, “Why, why would you say that? Why would you, umm, you know, tease a person in that way?” So thinking about that. [Walked back to the white board and motions toward the terms written on it] And also just thinking about just the variations, again, the ways in w-, and these probably aren’t all the various different identities, right? But by the time you all get out in schools to teach, I mean, we all, certainly when I was in school, you didn’t even have many of, uh, these categories here [points to the terms transsexual, gender queer, drag and cross dresser on the white board and then walks slowly back to behind the computer podium talking with her hands as she continues talking]. Now, you know, there are, there are groups in schools where kids can kind of celebrate their unique identities, and by the time you all become teachers, there will be variations, even more variations in how students perform their gender identities. And so 125 just thinking about, umm, how will I not constrain students into boxes, right? How will I be more accepting and creative in my classroom around students’ different gender identities, and not constrain them? 129. Mary: [aside] Yes. “How will I not constrain students into boxes, right? How will I be more accepting and creative in my classroom around students’ different gender identities, and not constrain them?” These are two great questions for Imani to offer her students to reflect upon as future teachers. All too often girls and women are constrained by the roles expected of them in society as subservient and submissive caretakers (among other things). It is very important to dismantle gender bias and sexism within schools as one way to eliminate gender inequality in society more broadly. These teacher candidates are poised to be agents of change by challenging gender stereotypes and promoting gender equality and bias-free classroom and school environments for their students. 130. Judith: [aside] At the end of this section of the class period, Bethany suggests promoting students to “cross the lines” of gender roles and the binary system of gender. Imani reinforces this by saying “exactly, promoting that.” And so, it seems clear that both the instructor and this student, and perhaps others are poised to explore ideas and strategies about how to deconstruct the binary system of gender, or at least challenge it, within K-12 classrooms, and society more broadly. I wonder what would have been added to the previous two activities (the free writing and the stereotypes activity) had this discussion of sex and gender been first? 131. Alice [aside] This entire discussion on the distinctions between sex and gender is compelling. I wonder how the distinctions between sex and gender play out in these students lives, especially as it relates to their identities overall including race, gender, social 126 class, etc.? I am especially curious about this given the fact that during the lecture part of this activity all but one of the students who spoke were African American students. To me, that speaks to the interest and experience of these students with the social construction of identities beyond gender alone and opens doors to explore with them the ways that they engage with, or resist, the norms within society from their unique racial, gender and social class standpoints. Scene 4: Sex/Gender – Reflections This section of the course was particularly exciting to me as this activity is one that I did with my students and one that I shared with the instructor group. Seeing it play out with this class was interesting. And, I really applaud Imani for giving it a go, especially because I know that it is an area that she is still learning and growing in (even though aren’t we all in some regard?). The instructor did a good job overall, in my opinion, attempting to get her students to see the distinctions between sex, gender, and sexual orientation. This is one particular place in the research project where it is clear that my subjectivity comes into play. Because I have taught TE 201, and have the research and life experiences that I do, this section of the class session stands out to me. As a result of my intimate involvement with the teaching of TE 201 and my interest and expertise with this activity, my ability to analyze it may be impacted. For example, my assessment of the instructor doing “a good job overall” with the presentation of the content in the sex/gender lecture is likely related to my perspective that, in general, instructors of TE 201 did not cover this content at all. With all of this in mind, let’s get back to the commentaries of Judith, Alice and Mary. This choice of activity was able to really highlight the postmodern feminist lens and Judith’s perspective of seeing gender as performed or enacted within various contexts within and 127 outside of what is seen as the traditional binary system of gender. The content itself as presented by the instructor encouraged students to examine the ways gender is socially constructed within this society and that biological sex (male, female and intersex) does not necessarily align with the binary system of gender children and adults typically adhere to in taking on the roles of “girl,” “boy,” “woman,” and “man.” Further, people who explicitly resist the norms of gender and sex may identify as transgender. This content engages students in the possibilities that exist to maintain and/or transcend the binary system of gender within their day-to-day practices and their self-identifications. Judith also points out the ways that the students, and the instructor, struggle with the language and often conflate or confuse the concepts of sex, gender and sexual orientation. She acknowledges that this is a frequent misconception within society generally. Lesbian, gay and bisexual people are commonly presented as performing in gender nonconforming ways. Also, the terms sex and gender are often used interchangeably. Further, the terms intersex and transgender are largely misunderstood and in large part left out of conversations of gender altogether. Within this scene, the intersections of race, gender, and other social and cultural identity characteristics were not specifically brought to the forefront. As Alice points out, the connections to the students own experiences, especially as related to race and other identity characteristics could have expanded and deepened the conversation. The instructor could have included within her lecture the various ways in which people express and perform gender as well as race, social class, and their multiplicity of identities. One of the students even made the comment, “everything is socially constructed” when Imani began the discussion of terminology related to sex and gender. This shows us that the possibilities for expanding this discussion to include several other identity markers, as well as the students’ readiness to do so. In addition to this, the 128 fact that African American students were the overwhelming contributors to the mini-lecture on terminology speaks to the ways in which these students could relate to the content and concepts of social construction. Lastly, again (or still) you could see the ways that gender bias and sexist patterns of communication and interaction persist even within this classroom. Mary comments specifically on the instance where a male student, Terrance, restates the same sentiment that a female student, Rasheena, had just expressed. After Rasheena reacts, the instructor jokes with the male student (and the rest of the class) by saying that Terrance was helping to reiterate for the class the point that Rasheena had shared. However, it is clear by the reactions of the students and the instructor that the oversight on the part of Terrance was indicative of his not listening to Rasheena in the first place. This is a common communication pattern between women and men. All three of the commentaries provided by Alice, Mary and Judith show us that the social construction of gender as it relates to this sex/gender terminology lecture is a salient issue for these students’ as they consider their roles as future teachers. Mary sees the ways that examining and challenging the social construction of gender can liberate girls and women from confining sexist roles and expectations. Judith shows us that the possibilities for people to express and perform gender within and beyond the binary system of gender are endless. And, Alice points to the open doors of opportunity that exist for teacher educators and their students to explore the social construction of multiple identity issues simultaneously. These perspectives pervade the context of teacher education here in this classroom, and speak to the ways in which the future teachers of this course can integrate and expand their own minds in order to become better teachers for their future K-12 students. I can’t wait to see what comes next! 129 Scene 5: Tough Guise – Guiding Questions Next we move into the showing of a video clip to introduce more content on gender to the class. Throughout the video clip, it is important to examine the intersections between the information highlighted in the video and the three perspectives shared by Judith, Alice and Mary. The questions and commentaries provided help us to see the ways in which gender and education are being taught in multiple ways simultaneously by what happens in this scene in each of the three primary locations of course content, teacher moves and student moves. In watching this next scene, look for places where the three theoretical perspectives are interwoven within the three locations. Specifically, what issues salient to gender and education are raised in the video? And, in the follow up discussion about the video, how can we see issues of gender and education playing out between the instructor and the students, as well as among the students? The following questions are offered to guide your viewing of and reflections upon the next scene. Liberal Feminism (Mary) 1. What does Jackson Katz explore regarding the “Tough Guise”? 2. What factors contribute to the performance of violent masculinities? 3. What are the implications of not conforming to the “real man” persona for men? For women? 4. How familiar are you with the gendered statistics related to violent crimes? Womanism (Alice) 1. In what ways are men of color distinctly impacted by the portrayal of violent masculinity? 2. How relevant are the topics raised within “Tough Guise” to students in urban schools? 130 Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 1. What are the relationships between gender and sexuality raised in this scene? 2. How do you interpret the interactions between the instructor and students in the discussion following the viewing of the “Tough Guise” video clip? Scene 5: Tough Guise – Script [Imani has just finished her mini-lecture on the distinctions between sex and gender. As she moves from behind to the computer podium to her right, she quickly shifts into this next section of the day’s activities.] 1. Imani: So with that, we’re gonna move into watching a video. You probably need a clean sheet of paper for this. The video is called, “Tough Guise,” G U I S E [Stacey gets up and walks to the opposite side of the classroom and exits the room] 2. Peter: [Overlapping] Ha, ha, ha 3. Imani: [to Peter] Have you seen it? 4. Peter: I read the title 5. Imani: Oh, ok. Tough Guise. And we’re gonna watch a couple of clips from that. And then I’ll put, umm some questions up about today’s readings, umm. Actually, well, I can’t do it at the same time. We’ll come back to these questions a little…[trailing off, indistinguishable]. Oh, let me move this out of the way. [Walks over and moves the white board from the center of the projection area back to the right front of the classroom] “Tough Guise,” and it really focuses on, [Peter gets up and walks to the other side of the room and out the door. Summer sneezes. As Imani continues, Kelli pats Summer on the back] 131 6. Imani: bless you, the construction of masculinity. And so I want you to focus on what you hear these boys and men talking about masculinity. “Tough Guise,” G U I S E 7. Terrance: That supposed to be a hint at disguise? 8. Imani: Huh? [Indistinguishable side conversations, and conversation between myself and the instructor as she sets up the video. Stacey returns to her seat] 9. Imani: Listen up, shhhh 10. Imani: [aside] After viewing some videos related to the topic of gender during the instructor orientation this past summer, I finally took the time to sit down and go through them on my own to undertake using them in my own teaching. “Tough Guise,” which the students are about to see the introduction to is one of them. Next class, I will also show them part of the video “Killing Us Softly 3.” [Video starts. Imani begins to walk to the back of the class. Kelli gets up to turn the lights off. Imani stops walking and directs her which lights to turn off and then returns to the front of the classroom to adjust the technology some more. She then walks behind the computer podium, grabs the chair from the right of the projection screen and sits down behind the computer podium. Peter returns to his seat just before the Pearl Jam song starts] [Montage of images and clips from mainstream entertainment and news media] 11. We’re going to murder those lousy Hun bastards by the bushel. Never show weakness. The only pain that matters is the pain you inflict. It’s the roughest and toughest show on TV: The American Gladiators. [Christopher puts both arms out in front of him in response to the American Gladiators] You gotta out-tough people when you get down there, its man-on-man out there. 132 Police say boys ages thirteen and eleven were arrested near the school carrying guns and wearing camouflage. Two in three million Americans are battered in their home every year… [Pearl Jam song: Better Man] 12. Talkin’ to herself, there’s no one else who needs to know... She tells herself, oh... Memories back when she was bold and strong And waiting for the world to come along... Swears she knew it, now she swears he’s gone She lies and says she’s in love with him, can’t find a better man... She dreams in color, she dreams in red, can’t find a better man... She lies and says she still loves him, can’t find a better man... She dreams in color, she dreams in red, can’t find a better man... Can’t find a better man… [Laughter and other audible reactions to the clips shown during this song] [Movie: The Wizard of Oz] 13. Oz has spoken! Who are you? I am the great and powerful Wizard of Oz. You’re a very bad man. Oh no, my dear, I’m a very good man. I’m just a very bad wizard. 14. JACKSON KATZ: The climactic scene where Toto pulls back the curtain to reveal a nervous, tragic man, pretending to be the great and powerful Oz, represents more than just 133 the classic moment in American cinematic history, rather, it also gave us a metaphor for looking at masculinity in a new way. Not as a fixed, inevitable state of being, but rather as a projection, a pose, a guise, an act, a mask that men often wear to shield our vulnerability and hide our humanity. 15. Judith: [aside] The parallel drawn between the Wizard of Oz and masks which men put on raises important questions about the performance of gender. Men make choices each day to act in ways that either coincide with and/or challenge norms and discourses of gender. Questioning and critiquing the inherent nature of masculinity opens various possibilities and opportunities for men to make conscious choices about whether or not to perform their gender identities in ways that will resist and/or maintain the ways of being that have appeared to be fixed or “natural.” 16. JACKSON KATZ: This mask can take a lot of forms but one that’s really important for us to look at in our culture at the millennium is what I call the Tough Guise. The front that many men put up that’s based on an extreme notion of masculinity that emphasizes toughness and physical strength and gaining the respect and admiration of others through violence or the implicit threat of it. Boys and young men learn early on that being a so-called "real man" means you have to take on the "tough guise," in other words you have to show the world only certain parts of yourself that the dominant culture has defined as manly. You can find out what those qualities are if you just listen to young men themselves: 17. YOUNG MEN: A real man is physical. Strong. 134 Independent. Intimidating. Powerful. Strong. Independent. In control. Rugged. Scares people. Powerful. Respected. Hard. A stud. Athletic. Muscular. A real man is tough. Tough. Tough. 18. JACKSON KATZ: And just as most young men know what our culture expects of a "real man," they also know very well what you get called if you don’t measure up: 19. YOUNG MEN: You get a called a pussy. A bitch. A fag. 135 Queer. Soft. You’re a little momma’s boy. Emotional. Girly. A wimp. Bitch. Queer. You get called weak. Wuss. Sissy. A fag. A fag. Fag. You’re a fag. [Laughter in response to some of the clips of men saying these words, particularly after the two men that say “bitch” and a couple of the men that say “fag”] 20. JACKSON KATZ: So for boys, and this is true for every racial and ethnic background, and every socioeconomic group, to be a real man – to be tough, strong, independent, respected – means fitting into this narrow box that defines manhood. The terms that are the opposite of that: wuss, wimp, fag, sissy are insults that are used to keep boys boxed in, so if you're a boy it's pretty clear there's a lot of pressure on you to conform, to put up the act, to be just one of the guys. 136 21. Mary: [aside] Let us not overlook the fact that some of the worst insults that can be assigned to men or boys are terms that refer to them as girly or womanly, and the implications therein that being a girl or woman is a lower social position, and highly undesirable. The use of terms like “girly” and “bitch” to insult boys and men also serves to reinforce gender stereotypes for girls and women as hyper-feminized and over-emotional. 22. Judith: [aside] Further, the relationship between these characterizations of men as feminized and their sexualities expands the complexity of the social and emotional power relations in place related to sex, gender, and sexual orientation. The risk of gender nonconformity for some boys and men is that they may be assumed to be gay, which can be a powerful tool for heterosexism and sexism alike in keeping them “in their place” performing more socially acceptable gender roles. Furthermore, the way these insults are employed also contributes to the conflation of sex, gender and sexuality in much of the discourse on gender in education. Using epithets that simultaneously put down boys and men by calling them both terms that infer femininity and homosexuality reinforce discourses that blur the lines between gender non-conformity and non-heterosexuality. 23. JACKSON KATZ: So the next question is, where do boys learn this? Obviously they learn it in many different places. They learn it from their families, their community, but one of the most important places they learn it is the powerful and pervasive media system which provides a steady stream of images that define manhood as connected with dominance, power and control. This is true across all racial and ethnic groups but it’s even more pronounced for men of color because there’s so little diversity of images for them, to begin with – for example, Latino men are almost always presented either as boxers, criminals, or tough guys in the 137 barrio, and Asian-American men are disproportionately portrayed as martial artists and violent criminals. 24. Alice: [aside] It is very important to note the impact of these images and discourses of men, and specifically the ways that men of color are portrayed. In addition to the disproportionate portrayal of men of color, there is also a disproportionate impact on the lives of men of color that is extremely distressing. The relationship between the images of men of color as violent and the violence that pervades communities of color is far from coincidental. When men and boys are bombarded with visions and expectations of who they are and will be in their lives and in the world, combined with consistent personal and institutional experiences of racism, men of color are positioned and conditioned to live out the violence that they are born into. And, the impact extends into the lives of everyone in these men’s lives, too, their mothers, their families, their children and their communities. 25. JACKSON KATZ: But transcending race, what the media do is help to construct violent masculinity as a cultural norm. In other words, violence isn’t so much a deviation, but an accepted part of masculinity. We have to start examining this system, and offering alternatives because one of the major consequences of all of this, is that there’s been a growing connection made in our society between being a man and being violent. In fact, some of the most serious problems in contemporary American society, especially those connected with violence, can be looked at as essentially problems in contemporary American masculinity. [During this next section of the video, Imani gets up, erases most of the white board with the recorded terms from the stereotypes activity (to the left of the projection screen) and writes the “posters” and “responders” for the day] 138 26. JACKSON KATZ: For example, over 85% of the people who commit murder, are men, and the women that do, often do so as defense against men who are battering them. Ninety percent of people who commit violent physical assault are men. Ninety-five percent of serious domestic violence is perpetrated by males, and its been estimated that one in four men will use violence against a partner in their lifetime. Over 95% of dating violence is committed by men, and very often it’s young men in their teens. Studies have found that men are responsible for between 85% and 95% of child sexual abuse whether the victim is female or male. And 99.8% of people in prison convicted of rape, are men. 27. Mary: [aside] Violence against women is still a major concern. This is the case in all sectors of society, including schools. It has become commonplace in ways that render it an almost normal aspect of our society, which is quite troubling. And, the impacts on the psyche of girls and women, which in turn affects their academic performance, are unmistakable. 28. JACKSON KATZ: What this shows is that an awful lot of boys and men are inflicting an incredible level of pain and suffering, both on themselves and on others. And we know that much of the violence is cyclical, that many boys who are abused as children grow up and become perpetrators themselves. So calling attention to the way that masculinity is connected to these problems is not anti-male – it’s just being honest about what’s going on in boys’ and men’s lives. And while women have been at the forefront of change and trying to talk about these issues in the culture, it’s not just women who will benefit if men’s lives are transformed. In fact, while men commit a shameful level of violence against women in our society, statistically speaking, the major victims of men’s violence are other males. There are millions of male trauma survivors walking around today, men who were bullied 139 as adolescents, or abused physically or sexually as children. Thousands more men and boys are murdered or assaulted every year – usually by other men. So, men have a stake in dealing with these problems, and not just those of us who have been victims, but also those men who are violent, or who have taken on the tough guise, they do so also at the expense of their emotional and relational lives. 29. YOUNG WOMAN: Some of my friends, they just walk around like they’re better than everybody, and their tough and all that stuff. And then I’ll be alone with them, and they’ll be like the biggest babies. If they have like a problem with a girlfriend or something, they’ll be like crying and stuff, but when they’re around a lot of people they’ve got that big front, they’ve gotta be tough. 30. JACKSON KATZ: I deal with this front all the time in my own work as an anti-violence educator. I’ve worked with literally thousands of boys and men on high school, college, and professional sports teams, in the United States military, in juvenile detention centers. I’ve seen an awful lot of men and young men put on this tough guise. In many ways, they’re putting it on as a survival mechanism – they have to do it to survive in whatever peer culture they happen to be in. But putting on the tough guise comes with a cost and that is a cost in terms of damage to their psyches and their ability to be decent human beings. So it’s in everyone’s interest to examine masculinity, to pull back the curtain on the tough guy posing, and see what’s really going on underneath. [Movie: Raging Bull] 31. I want you to hit me with everything you’ve got. You sure? Yeah. Harder. Harder. Harder. Harder. 140 That’s hard. Harder. Harder. What are you trying to prove? What does it prove? [Imani gets up to turn the video off and then returns to standing behind the computer podium] 32. NEWS REPORTER: There is more details and a profile developing of kids… 33. Imani: Turn the light on for me. So don’t move. We’re gonna stop it right there. That was the intro. We’re gonna watch “Hidden: A Gender” [air quotes and smiling] first thing [Kelli turns the lights back on] 34. Peter: Ha ha 35. Imani: Thursday, first thing in class on Thursday, but I wanna take a few comments in these three minutes. What did you see, hear about masculinity? What did you learn about how we construct masculinity in this society? [Hands raised: Rasheena & Rhonda] Rasheena [Instructor walks over and looks down at computer and then looks back up to listen to Rasheena] 36. Rasheena: Umm, he was saying that they hide it in order to survive in that, you know, that society which it’s true, like, now that he said it, like lot of boys do be like, they be like [indistinguishable] but then when they’re around their other friends or in public they gotta put on this, this disguise [Cheryl raises her hand. Imani calls on Rhonda even though her hand is not still raised] 37. Imani: That disguise, mmm hmm. What else? Rhonda, did you want to add something different? [Takes flashdrive out of computer and places it on the table in front of her and 141 then listens with her arms crossed for a bit before walking in front of the table and leaning back on it to finish listening] 38. Rhonda: Um, no, I was just gonna say the same thing, like, it was like he said it was really the truth cuz I know, personally like guys that are, have on this big front like in front of their boys or whatever, but when, you know, their having a problem they come to you and be all, you know, emotional 39. Imani: [Overlapping] Mmm hmm, 40. Rhonda: [Continuing] And stuff 41. Imani: Mmm hmm. Other thoughts? [Hands raised: Cheryl, Maria, Terrance] Yeah, Terrance [Walks back around table to behind the computer podium area] 42. Terrance: I just didn’t like how he eq-, he equated like masculinity with violence. That was, that was, a-, from my perspective as a male, I thought that was wrong. 43. Imani: Did you not see evidence of it through what he was trying to say? 44. Terrance: He was showing movies…[continues talking, indistinguishable] 45. Imani: [Talking over what Terrance is saying] Or did people, uh, see the evidence? [Cheryl and Lily raise their hands – seemingly in response to Imani’s question] 46. Imani: [Walks to her left behind the table] I mean, we watch these movies all the time where guy-, males are [Indistinguishable, overlapping comment by Aisha] 47. Imani: Right. He gave statistics and he used the media, right, as his main point. I want you all to think about, I mean, you may not like it as a male 48. Terrance: Yeah, that’s what I’m sayin’…[trailing off, indistinguishable] [Cheryl and Lily raise their hands again] 142 49. Imani: [Continuing and overlapping] But it’s a reality. Think about all the movies we watch where men beat up or bully people, not just women, other men, and that’s part of their toughness, umm, and so, again, thinking about the construction of masculinity and how lot’s of men do or don’t fit into that construction. Masculinity is often constructed as being violent. [Cheryl raises her hand again] Cheryl 50. Cheryl: I just thought it was interesting that he posed, like, how gender equality is not just a female issue, it’s everybody’s issue. 51. Imani: [Begins to gather handouts to pack up and then stops and listens with her right hand leaning against the computer podium and her left hand on her hip] Mmm hmm 52. Cheryl: And the second part was interesting how earlier we were talking about privilege and how masculinity is something that you’re privileged by. And then like putting this, his video in contrast it’s kinda like 53. Imani: Mmm hmm 54. Cheryl: Are, like, it kind of poses that if a person is like, are you really privileged by your privilege? You know what I mean? 55. Imani: Mmm hmm 56. Cheryl: Like, are you really 57. Imani: Mmm hmm 58. Cheryl: advantaged by your privilege? 59. Imani: [Overlapping] Kind of twists it 60. Cheryl: Yeah 143 61. Imani: [Walks to the center of the front of the room to wrap up the class] So we’ll continue this discussion on Thursday in addition to connecting gender with sexual orientation, in a way, ok? But they are different. So I’ll see you on Thursday. [Students continue to pack up, stand up and leave the classroom] 62. Marcus: Dr. Jones 63. Imani: I put up the responders and posters for today. [Class ends. Rasheena approaches Imani to ask a question after class] 64. Alice: [aside] It is notable that all of the students who commented following this video are African American. Does this bolster Katz’s claim about the extreme representations of men of color within the media related to violent masculinity? This is a very important point that is added in as somewhat of a side note. A discussion of the impacts of these images and constructions on men (and women) of color would be a powerful way to demonstrate the particular positionalities created and maintained within this society and beyond. And, that’s just the tip of the iceberg. This side note could shed light on experiences of men and women of color related to the prison industrial complex, patterns of economic and family structures, and much, much more. Do men and women of color have more at stake in this discussion? I would argue, yes. 65. Judith: [aside] In observing the interaction between Terrance and Imani, I am left wondering what is at the core of this apparent power struggle. Here, again, the instructor and this student are challenging each other. In this instance, the instructor corrects the student, in a sense, eliciting other students’ responses in opposition to his statement about not liking what was presented in the video and thinking that it was wrong. What role do race and gender play in this scenario? What about communication style and dynamic? 144 66. Mary: [aside] This scene continues to drive home the point that sexism is produced and maintained within this society. Even the comments made by male students in this classroom contribute to it. For Terrance to say that he doesn’t agree with equating masculinity with violence even after all of the discussion and statistics shown in the video is amazing, yet not surprising considering the ways that gender bias and discrimination still pervade this society. Scene 5: Tough Guise – Reflections Here in this scene, we see the instructor show the beginning part of a video clip from the film, “Tough Guise: Violence, Media & the Crisis in Masculinity” featuring Jackson Katz an anti-violence educator. The introduction to the video provides us with an understanding of what Katz calls the “tough guise” and argues that the ways that violence has become a normalized and expected characteristic of masculinity, especially as portrayed in the media. Mary, Alice and Judith each take interest and find value in the content presented in the video, as well as the discussion within the classroom following the viewing of the clip. Mary highlights the aspects of the film that depict and describe the impact of violent masculinity on girls and women. Her comment about the pervasiveness of violence against women clearly illustrates this point. Also of note to Mary is the reality that boys and men are often ridiculed by being called feminine, or one of the many feminized insults available within the general discourse of society. We also see through Mary’s commentary the impact of the perspective and comments shared by Terrance as a male student in the classroom saying that he disagrees with what was presented in the video in spite of the overwhelming evidence and factual data that is included in the video about violence perpetrated by men and boys. According to 145 Mary, this response by Terrance is further evidence of the pervasive and unquestioned system of sexism that promotes and maintains gender bias and discrimination against girls and women. Alice urges us to take serious the implication of the “tough guise” in relation to race and social class identities. In particular, she underscores the distinction that is made within the video about men of color being even disproportionately portrayed in violent and criminal ways. Alice discusses the impact of this depiction combined with the lived experiences of people of color that bring to light stories of violence that go far beyond the brief mention within the introduction to the video. Within this scene, Judith continues to interrogate the specific instances of gendered performance within and beyond the binary system of gender. The inclusion of the scene where Toto pulls back the curtain on the Wizard of Oz is one quite overt demonstration of the performance of gender, which Judith explains shows the possibilities to challenge the beliefs and discourses around inherent or “natural” qualities to gender identities. Also in this scene, Judith helps us to examine additional ways gender and sexuality are confused and conflated, as well as the implications related to power and identity. Fears that men may have about homosexuality and/or being identified as homosexual serve to maintain the “tough guise” when boys and men are criticized for performing outside the accepted norms for masculinity by questioning not only their “manhood” but also their heterosexuality. Lastly, Judith continues to follow the interactions between Imani and Terrance and questions the use of power on both their parts related to the content and their relationships and positions with each other. To see this student and the instructor continuing to challenge each other in various ways throughout the class session cannot be overlooked. The implications of this 146 relationship related to various aspects of power (contextual, positional, historical) still remains unknown. I am glad to see that the instructor will continue the discussion and content on gender tomorrow in spite of tightness of course schedule. It is challenging, in my opinion, to adequately “cover” gender in education in one, or even two, course periods. Although I know that there are constraints in putting together the course syllabus, it still feels like there should be a better way. The complex dynamics related to issues of gender in education that have already been raised within these 60 minutes provide for such a depth and breadth of conversation and education. And, as you can see by the comments from Mary, Alice and Judith, the multiplicity of voices and perspectives on the issues are immense. Within this issue of the ways violence is gendered, alone, the focus can be on gender bias and sexism, the lived experiences of people related to issues of race and other aspects of identity, the circumstances and situations within and beyond this classroom that evoke and enact gendered power relations, or any combination of these and countless other perspectives. I would argue that there could be a class for teacher candidates on issues of gender alone! 147 Act 2: Day Two (10/16) Scene 1: Set Up Day Two – Guiding Questions This next scene provides the set-up for the second class session where gender is the primary topic of discussion, an extension of the agenda from the previous day of class. In this introduction, you will see the ways in which the instructor and the students interact casually before they get into the content of the day. This part of the day gives us an opportunity to examine what is taught about gender and education in a predominantly informal way, looking at the patterns of communication and interaction, as well as the topics discussed outside the specified course content for this day. As the scene unfolds, pay attention to who is speaking, in what ways, and about what, as ways to examine what is occurring. Mary, Judith and Alice will continue to raise points to reflect on along the way through their particular viewpoints (Liberal Feminism, Postmodern Feminism, and Womanism). What do you see being taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course in this scene? The following questions are offered to support your observations of the scene to come. Womanism (Alice) 1. In what ways does this scene highlight the intersection of race and gender identities and experiences? Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 1. What are the meanings and impacts of casual conversation between the instructor and students at the beginning of this class period? Liberal Feminism (Mary) 1. What patterns of gendered communication do you observe in this scene? 148 Scene 1: Set Up Day Two – Script [Lots of loud student-student and student-teacher conversations. Instructor is at the front of the classroom behind the computer podium and/or the table next to it talking with the students casually and unpacking her materials before the class begins] 1. Imani: I need, need to sell my tickets, please somebody buy tickets. [Multiple conversations continue] 2. Imani: If I don’t sell em, I have to pay for them. 3. Kelli: Wait, when is this? 4. Christopher: Can I do an extra credit…[trailing off, indistinguishable] 5. Kelli: When is it? 6. Imani: [Laughs] Extra credit. I would not make you pay to go to an event to then get extra credit. But, it is, umm it’s a good show. I went, it comes to Lansing every two years. The, the Links, a group I’m a part of, we sponsor it. [Indistinguishable conversation] 7. Imani: It is, it’s a runway fashion show 8. Kelli: Oh. Where does it happen? 9. Imani: The Lansing Center. [Indistinguishable conversation] 10. Imani: Yeah, no, it is, it is a fashion show. Umm, I don’t know if you’re familiar with Ebony Magazine, yeah, and so it’s the Ebony Fashion Fair. And they travel all around…[indistinguishable] [Timothy approaches Imani and hands her a paper] 11. Imani: [To Timothy] I saw that on the news last night [trailing off, indistinguishable] 149 [Timothy returns to his seat. Conversation with the women about the Fashion Fair continues. Imani moves back behind the computer podium and puts the paper from Timothy down.] 12. Imani: [To Kelli] Yeah, just email me. 13. Imani: [aside] The Ebony Fashion Fair is an annual fashion show that is put on by “The Links, Inc.” I am a member of this organization that is hosting the Fashion Fair as a fundraiser this year, and so am selling tickets to the event. [Indistinguishable conversations] 14. Alice: [aside] As the instructor talks with her students about the tickets she is trying to sell for the Ebony Fashion Fair, we gain a bit more insight into her life experiences related to race, class, and gender. I wonder what her level of involvement with this event is and how this speaks to her level of engagement within communities within and beyond the university? Regardless, this is an instance that humanizes the instructor by shedding light on who she is outside of the classroom as an African American woman (something we didn’t see much of explicitly in the previous class period). 15. Researcher: [aside] It is actually uncommon for Imani to be quite so quiet and reserved in sharing her personal experiences with the students. I have witnessed her be very open overall with them and offering herself and her identity characteristics as examples for various discussions and activities. I’m not sure why she has shared less here. Perhaps it is because of the time constraints with having used up such a large chunk of the previous class session covering the logistics of course assignments? [Students continue to have loud side conversations with each other. Imani standing behind the table begins class almost yelling over them] 150 16. Imani: How many people went to the umm, shhh, ok let’s get started so we’ll be on time. [Students side conversations continue. Sarah enters and sits in the open seat closest to the computer podium where Chelsea usually sits] 17. Imani: [Talking loudly over the students’ conversations] How many people went 18. Bethany: Shhh 19. Imani: to the GLBT seminar last week? Just show of hands, so just… [trailing off, indistinguishable] [Laura raises her hand] 20. Imani: Ok, was it informative? Did you… [Laura nods her head in response] 21. Imani: Ok, did you… 22. Laura: Actually, I didn’t really know what it was about until I got there and I was like, ok… It was really cool, though. I had no idea. 23. Imani: [overlapping] Mmm hmm. Yeah, the second one is on the 30th, so I encourage, umm, you to go to that one because by then we will have talked about these issues in class. Umm, and then who went to the ELL, did anyone go? [Marcus and Kelli raise their hands] 24. Imani: Ok Marcus went to the, and Kelli well to the ELL presentation. Informative? Helpful? [Indistinguishable or non-verbal affirmative responses. Cristina and Nikki enter late and take two open seats on the far side of the classroom] 25. Imani: Good, good. Just wanted to know, ok. And then Friday was the special ed one, right, last Friday? Did anybody go to that one? 151 26. Marcus: I didn’t want to wake up that early 27. Imani: [laugh] Ok, but that’s good you went to a couple. Good. 28. Mary: [aside] This brief scene is a classic example of how male students take up more space in the classroom. There are 26 students enrolled in this section of the course and 23 are present right now (5 male students and 18 female students). In this short introduction to the class session, 5 students speak (3 male students and 2 female students). One male and one female interact with the instructor casually in conversation prior to the start of class, one male student approaches the instructor about something before class, and one male and one female student respond verbally to her questions about the presentations students were encouraged to attend. This may seem like a minor issue, however, for the male students to be interacting with the instructor more than half of the instances is striking considering male students represent about 22 percent of the students present at this time. 29. Alice: [aside] It is important, too, to consider race and context when looking at these interactions. Of the students who spoke, two were white females, one was a white male and two were black males. And, given the significant change in seating pattern on this day, these interactions speak to the informal relationships that the instructor has built with her students that they would be comfortable speaking casually with her, approaching her, and joking around with her. All of this is also impacted by the fact that 2 black women were late entering the classroom, therefore missing most of this time as well as being left with seating options farther away from the instructor. 30. Judith: [aside] Another important point is to notice the dynamic of when and if students raise their hand before speaking. In this particular scene, most of the conversation is casual and so may not require this formality. However, in spite of this Laura raised her hand 152 before speaking, whereas Marcus did not. This could be an indication of the types of relationships the instructor has developed with her students, yet, why would some students raise their hand some of the time and not others? These situations bring forward questions about the performance of gendered classroom norms and expectations related to turn taking and speaking. Perhaps the men of this classroom feel in some way that it is not necessary or important to raise their hand to make more causal comments and conversation? Scene 1: Set Up Day Two – Reflections Again, you can see contrasting and yet complementary readings of the scene presented by Judith, Alice and Mary. It is important point to note the change in seating pattern from the previous class session. Two of the women who entered late, Cristina and Nikki, usually sat where Timothy was already seated, information that Alice, Mary and Judith would not be aware of in observing just these two class sessions. I am sure, however, that this could be explored by each of the three storylines as the fact that a white male student would take the place of two black female students would be poignant from all three perspectives. Without having the benefit of their comments about the varied locations of the students, let us move to what is observed and commented on by Alice, Mary and Judith as there is still much to be explored. Alice continues to observe the seating patterns and the ways in which the students relate with the instructor informally. This highlights the relationships that she has formed with them and the ways that she has opened herself as a person up to the students by sharing her personal life experiences. Specifically in this scene, she talks informally with her students about the Ebony Fashion Fair, that she is selling tickets for it, and a brief description of the event. Mary responds to this scene after observing the gendered patterns of communication. As she shares with us, this short scene shows us that more than half of the students that interact with 153 the instructor are men. This is a staggering reality considering that around 20% of the students in the class at the time were men. This observation, according to Mary, is no minor one. In fact, this could be a microcosm of the class participation dynamics in general. We will have to wait and see. Judith also has questions for us regarding the participation patterns within this scene. Her observations come from a more particular form of interaction, whether or not a student raises their hand and waits to be called on before speaking. Judith interrogates this dynamic and ponders whether or not it speaks to a gendered pattern of classroom participation? If so, what are the implications of the pattern? Which students feel comfortable speaking out without raising their hand, and in what ways? We’ll have to keep an eye out for this as we continue to watch. Overall, this scene is exemplary of one of my overarching research objectives, to demonstrate that there are complex, complimentary and contradictory stories of what is taught about gender in education, and by extension gender in teacher education, gender in multicultural education and gender in multicultural teacher education within and beyond this particular classroom. To be able to look at a scene this short and to identify so many talking points from diverse viewpoints underscores the need to broaden and deepen our teaching and learning about gender in these fields. I can’t wait to see more! Scene 2: Hidden: A Gender – Guiding Questions The following scene shows the video clip “Hidden: A Gender” from “Tough Guise” which the instructor showed the beginning parts of in the previous class session. It takes some time to get things started, and so we are able to see additional time and interactions that are more casual and unstructured between the students and the instructor, as well as among the students. Through these interactions, we are able to look more closely at what is being taught 154 about gender and education in these informal instances. Once the instructor gets the video up and running, we are able to focus again on the content included in this class session that teaches about issues of gender and education, specifically the invisibility of norms around masculinity and violence. Following the video, the students and the instructor discuss the relevance and applicability of the topics that are raised within the video for the students generally, as well as related to their roles as future teachers in urban schools. Again, it is important to look at specific topics brought to light within the video and the discussion that follows, as well as the interactions between the students and the instructor and among the students. Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 1. In what ways does joking around contribute to maintaining and/or challenging power relationships related to gender at the beginning of this scene? 2. In what ways have the images of men and women changed over time? 3. How do you see dating and/or sexual relationships between teachers and students as related to issues of gender and education more broadly? 4. How are masculinities and femininities performed in urban schools? Liberal Feminism (Mary) 1. When discussing violence perpetrated by men and women, what are some of the important factors to include? 2. Do you feel that men and women are equally as violent and/or portrayed that way in the media? 3. What are the benefits and/or consequences for women of taking on more masculine characteristics? Womanism (Alice) 155 1. How do you see the conversation between some of the students and the instructor while she sets up the video as related to the content of the class session on gender? 2. What did you learn about gender and race by watching this scene? 3. Why do you think the instructor reacted the way she did to the mention of her daughter working at McDonald’s? 4. How relevant are the instructor’s comments as a mother relevant to the course content on gender and race? 5. In what ways is urban school violence gendered? Scene 2: Hidden: A Gender – Script [Students are still unpacking and settling into the class. Aisha is texting on her cell phone. Timothy is doing something on his laptop. On the computer monitors around the room, Imani’s computer desktop image of her daughter is projected] 1. Imani: [Still preparing for teaching behind the front table and computer podium] Alright, so let me talk about what we’re gonna do today. Shhh. [Clapping lightly] Alright, settle down. 2. Rhonda: [Talking about the picture of Imani’s daughter] She is adorable! [Monica gets up and walks over and gives something to Kelli and then returns to her seat] 3. Imani: We’re going to [laughter seemingly in response to Rhonda’s comment] 4. Christopher: Shhhh 5. Imani: We’re going to, umm, finish looking at Tough Guise. We ended on Thur-, uh, Tuesday, let me just kinda bring your mind back to where we were. This video is about masculinity and how it’s been constructed in our society and that, I always forget that guy’s name 6. Laura: [overlapping - raises her hand, but speaks at the same time] Jackson Katz 156 7. Imani: but he’s an educator. Yes 8. Laura: He came to our school. I like totally forgot about that…[trailing off, indistinguishable] 9. Imani: [overlapping] Oh really 10. Laura: Yeah 11. Imani: [Continuing to unpack] He came to your high school? 12. Laura: He came to our high school and he actually showed that video 13. Imani: Really? 14. Laura: And people completely caused a really big [indistinguishable] cause everyone got really mad over it. At our other high school, out west 15. Imani: Yeah 16. Laura: He actually got booed off stage 17. Imani: Oh really? 18. Laura: Yeah, it was really bad [Indistinguishable student side conversations] 19. Imani: Interesting. Hmmm, interesting. [Indistinguishable student side conversations continue. Aisha puts hand lotion on and then hands it to Kelli who puts it on as well] 20. Imani: [Putting her bag on the floor and then pulls down on the front of her untucked button-down shirt] So, of course he makes this argument about masculinity at least in this country as being constructed over time as what? What are some of the characteristics? [Multiple students respond saying ‘violent’] 21. Imani: Violent. Umm… [trailing off] Basically violent [laughter] 157 [Indistinguishable student comments/conversations] 22. Imani: No, there was other stuff. Macho, you know, machismo, 23. Marcus: Fighting, buff 24. Imani: Fighting, mmm hmm, being tough, 25. Marcus: Muscular 26. Imani: mu-, even physical build, right, being muscular. OK. [Student side conversations continue and get louder] 27. Imani: Shhh. So we’re gonna continue with that. We’re gonna, the next clip if you want to write in your notes is called, “Hidden: A Gender,” 28. Marcus: A gender [Peter laughs] 29. Imani: And we’ll watch that clip and have a little bit of discussion. [Writes “Hidden: A Gender” on the white board to the right of the projection screen] And then, if you have your articles from Tuesday with you, then I’d like to take some comments from that. [Walks behind the computer podium and in front of it as she continues to talk] After we finish that we’ll move into a discussion of sexual orientation. Umm, really looking at, we always think about homo-, uh, homosexuals when we talk about sexual orientation, but I want you all to understand this, uh, notion of heterosexism which one of your articles was about. Homophobia, what are these terms? Let’s get an understanding of them, and then, um, we’ll look at a video on that stuff as well. So get ready to take some more notes on, how you see masculinity being constructed here, umm, and some comments that you might want to highlight. [Indistinguishable side conversations as the instructor begins to set up the video] 30. Peter: Such a cute little baby 158 [Continued side conversations] 31. Marcus: Dr. Jones, your daughter looks like she’s, uh, can speak like you, on the same level 32. Rhonda: …she probably could 33. Marcus: Well, umm, I believe that… 34. Rhonda: Ya 35. Marcus: …the socially constructed 36. Rhonda: [Laughs] 37. Marcus: [to Imani] Dr. Jones 38. Imani: Hm? 39. Marcus: Your daughter looks like she can speak as articulately as you. 40. Rhonda: Like you got… 41. Imani: [Standing behind computer podium] She can. [Student and instructor laughter] That’s why she’s sitting there…[Puts her hands together palm to palm to mirror the image of her daughter that is shown on the monitors] 42. Marcus: [Speaking as if he were Imani’s daughter] The socially constructed [laughs] 43. Rhonda: [Speaking as if she were Imani’s daughter] So what do you think about that? 44. Imani: She’s going to be an intellectual 45. Marcus: That’s so cute! 46. Imani: Along with many other things 47. Timothy: A McDonald’s employee? 48. Imani: No, she will not be a McDonald’s employee. [Indistinguishable responses and other student side conversations] 49. Imani: Why would you even say that? 159 50. Timothy: She’ll be the CEO 51. Laura: The CEO of McDonald’s is probably…[trailing off, indistinguishable] 52. Imani: She will be, umm [pauses and sighs], I don’t know, some kind of 53. Timothy: [indistinguishable comment to Imani] 54. Imani: I don’t know, whatever she wants to be. 55. Marcus: [claps] That’s right, unlimited ability 56. Imani: She’ll be whatever she wants to be. 57. Timothy: [indistinguishable comment to Imani] 58. Imani: [to Timothy] She probably will…[trailing off, indistinguishable] 59. Peter: [overlapping] With high expectations that she will do something great 60. Marcus: [overlapping] That’s so cool [Multiple student side conversations continue as Imani walks over to continue setting up the video] 61. Alice: [aside] Here is another example where we get to know more about Imani beyond the classroom. We learn through her own life experience as a mother her beliefs about gender by hearing her comments about her young daughter who Imani says will be “whatever she wants to be.” We can understand the ways the multiple identities of gender, race, and class impact children by witnessing this casual interaction between the instructor and her students. Also, looking more closely at this, we can also see a quite interesting exchange related to the possibility of Imani’s daughter working at McDonald’s. Without knowing more about the student, Timothy, who mentioned this possibility, albeit jokingly, I would argue that his comment has serious gendered, racial and social class implications. And, rightfully so, the instructor appears to be taken back by the suggestion. Her graceful 160 interrogation of the student allows him to reflect on making the comment, however, it could have been powerful and productive to explore these issues further with the class as a whole. 62. Mary: [aside] The conversation here between the instructor and her students highlights an important turn in the way girls are being raised. Hearing Imani talk about the future of her child and the instructor’s belief that her daughter will become, “whatever she wants to be” is an important statement. This demonstrates that the instructor is not only teaching about gender equality, but that she also is living it out in her own life as a mother. 63. Imani: Ok, this thing… [trailing off, indistinguishable] [Student side conversations continue] 64. Peter: [to Marcus] So wait, what are we watching? 65. Imani: Oh there it is. Can someone turn the lights down so I can see? [Kelli turns the lights down] 66. Imani: That’s good, that’s good 67. Marcus: Ooooh oooh ooooh ooooh. [to Timothy] How’s it feel to be like on an island by yourself, Timothy? 68. Peter: Yeah, hey Tim, put your cell phone away [laugh] 69. Marcus: And your Gmail 70. Imani: Timothy, are you telling on someone? 71. Peter: [overlapping] Stop surfing the internet in class, Tim! 72. Timothy: What? 73. Imani: Are you telling on someone? 161 74. Timothy: Am I telling on someone? [student laughter and continued side conversations] I didn’t say anything! That wasn’t my voice. You’re getting your white boys confused [student laughter] 75. Peter: [to researcher] Did you tell on us? 76. Researcher: [inaudible response to Peter, something like ‘what?’] 77. Peter: [to researcher] Did you tell on us? 78. Imani: [to Timothy] You are really out of control today 79. Rhonda: [in response to Imani] He really is, like for real! 80. Peter: [to researcher] With your cameras everywhere 81. Researcher: [inaudible response to Peter indicating that the researcher doesn’t communicate with the instructor about things like that] 82. Imani: He is really- [to Timothy] First you said my child was gonna work at McDonald’s. 83. Timothy: [to Imani] My participation’s going to be a zero for today 84. Peter: [to Researcher] Didn’t you get the email about no surfing the internet, no texting in class? 85. Imani: [to Timothy] I think you might be racist [lots of student laughter and ‘oh’s] 86. Researcher: [to Peter] No, I don’t talk to her at all. 87. Timothy: [to Imani] See now, did I say anything about your daughter working at McDonald’s because of her race? No. 88. Imani: I got, I’ve got office hours after class [student laughter] [Student side conversations continue] 89. Alice: [aside] Wow, the development of this interaction to a clear discussion of race allows the instructor to come back to the comment Timothy made earlier about her daughter. The 162 student seems to be unaware of how his comments have deeper implications than perhaps he previously understood. Again, Imani handles the comments with grace, joking back with the student to make her point that his comments could be considered racist. And, although this provides this students, and the rest of the class, the opportunity to reflect on what happened, a more guided and direct discussion of the issues could have expanded the education that is obviously necessary related to race, gender, and class based on this interaction. There could, however, also be costs to a more direct approach, including backlash from the students via end of the semester course evaluations that are largely anonymous and can be used to discredit instructors, particularly women of color. 90. Mary: [aside] Additionally, it is important to recognize the gendered patterns of communication playing out here as well. This male student appears to be attempting, knowingly or not, to undermine the instructor by joking with her about issues related to gender, race and class. This challenges the female instructor’s authority in the context of this classroom as a result. 91. Judith: [aside] The use of joking here is quite interesting. Related to the laughter present in the discourse in the previous class, the ways that power is invoked through joking (both by the student and the instructor) allows us to see much more than the words spoken alone. It is because of the subtlety of the comments embedded in joking that we can see the racial, gender, and class overtones of these interactions. 92. Imani: Where is it? 93. Researcher: [inaudible response] 94. Imani: Go down? 95. Researcher: I think it, I think it’s in the 9-12 section. You have to like go over… 163 96. Imani: [overlapping] Oh, ok. [Student side conversations continue until the video begins and the instructor continues to work on setting up the video, periodically asking the researcher questions. Eventually, the researcher gets up from sitting at the back of the class and goes to the front to help the instructor get the video started] 97. Researcher: [aside] More time elapses while the instructor sets up the video. Student side conversations continue. It is notable how much time is spent over the course of these two days setting up video and other technology. Out of the approximately 134 minutes of instruction time over the course of these two class periods, 18 (plus a couple more minutes on 10/16) minutes is spent on logistics, and over 8 is spent on technology set-up. Now, some of this was used by students to respond to the free-writing questions, however, it is still a significant amount of time taken away from active instruction. About 28 minutes out of the 134 is about 1/5 of the time devoted to issues of gender (which is actually borrowing from some of the time allocated to the topic of sexual orientation which comes next). 98. Imani: Alright, we’re ready. Shhh. [Students continue to talk a little more quietly. The video begins to play. Student side conversations fade a few sentences into the next video clip. Researcher returns to seat at the back of the classroom as the video begins. Shortly after it begins, the instructor gets a paper off the front table and pulls the chair there off to the side behind the computer podium and sits down and watches from the side] 99. NEWS REPORTER: There is more details and a profile developing of kids who kill kids. 100. JACKSON KATZ: One of the things that happens in typical discussions about social problems is that the very way we talk about the problems, tends to obscure some of the root 164 causes. For example, violence is not typically talked about as a gender issue, but the fact is that one gender, men, perpetrate approximately 90% of the violence. Now part of the reason for this is because men are the dominant group. And one of the ways dominance functions is through being unexamined. This is true for other areas as well. [Chelsea enters the classroom and looks around for a seat within the U-shaped seating pattern. Seeing none, she pulls a chair from the back of the room off to one of the side tables at the side of the room to sit] 101. JACKSON KATZ: For example, when we hear the word race in the United States we tend to immediately think African American, Latino, Asian American, Native American, etc. When we hear the term sexual orientation, we tend to think gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender. When we hear the term gender, we tend to think women. In each case the dominant group, white people, heterosexual people, men, don't get examined. As if men don't have a gender. As if white people don't belong to some racial grouping. As if heterosexual people don't have some sort of sexual orientation. In other words we focus always on the subordinated group and not on the dominant group. And that’s one of the ways that the power of dominant groups isn’t questioned – by remaining invisible. There’s a number of ways that this happens. For example, the linguist Julia Penelope talks about how the use of the passive voice when we talk about crimes against women, tends to shift our focus off of male perpetrators and on to female victims and survivors. For example we talk about how many girls were raped last year. How many women were assaulted? Or how many women were slain. As opposed to saying, how many men raped women or girls or how many boys or men assaulted and murdered women. 165 Another way in which we can see this idea about the invisibility of masculinity being played out is in the discussion about so-called “youth violence” You read headlines in newspapers all around the country about this problem of kids killing kids. 102. NEWS REPORTER: But after ten school shootings in three years, there is more detail and a profile developing of kids who kill kids. 103. JACKSON KATZ: But this isn't kids killing kids. Overwhelmingly it's boys killing boys and boys killing girls. An example of the way the media de-genders discussion of violence can be seen in the coverage of the Jonesboro, Arkansas massacre in the Spring of 1998. There were all these headlines about kids killing kids and children killing children and what's going on with our kids, etc. In fact, one article in the New York Times, a think piece that was a step back piece to try to discuss the whole issue of this range of school shootings, in one parentheses said, "All these shootings were done by boys" and then what was in the parentheses wasn't discussed in the rest of the article. So you have a whole article trying to pull together all the different factors that are causing these shootings and the one most important, in my opinion, is in the parentheses and not discussed. Some people will say, "Well, it's obvious that boys are doing these shootings." The reason why we don't say it, the reason why we say it's kids killing kids, everybody knows that boys are the one's doing the vast majority of the violence. You don't need to say it. But the fact is, if you don't say it, then in the subsequent discussion about the causes of the violence then you're going to leave out one of the key elements. Another example: road rage. People don't typically think of road rage as a gendered phenomenon but one recent study showed that out of ten thousand cases of aggressive 166 driving or road rage, over 95% were males, but you read the editorials in the newspapers throughout the country about road rage and the articles, essays, and opinion columns, and it's rarely talked about as a masculine or a male phenomenon. It's just a phenomenon on our roadways. If women were doing it, if 95% of the people doing it were women, you can bet that the single issue that would be talked about is, why are women, what is going on in the gender construction of women that cause them to act in that way? When girls commit violence, that's always the subject. The gendered nature of the crime is always part of the discussion. 104. CBS NEWS REPORTER: A sensational case goes on trial in Virginia tomorrow, involving a man who was sexually mutilated by his wife. 105. JACKSON KATZ: Now Lorena Bobbitt, her crime was brutal admittedly, and I understand believe me, as a man understand why people would be, especially men, would be very uncomfortable about that, [Peter laughs and one or more other students comment/react] 106. JACKSON KATZ: but every day men are murdering and mutilating women and it doesn't cause as a great a national outcry. One of the reasons why the film, Thelma and Louise, caused such a stir back in the early nineties was that women were the ones who were acting violently. [Movie: Thelma and Louise] 107. Oh my god, oh my god. Get in the car. Oh Jesus Christ. Louise, you shot him. 167 108. JACKSON KATZ: In other words you have films all the time, go into any video store and walk down the aisles and look at all the films that feature violence against women including sexualized violence against women by men, and there's little outcry and little commentary by the movie critics for example, when they are reviewing these films. They don't talk about the fact that we have this huge epidemic of men assaulting women and we're making yet another film about an assault against women? Look at the recent remake of Psycho. That was not part of the discussion when Psycho re-released. We're yet again, going to show a sexualized image of a woman being assaulted and that's going to be considered great art? And people are going to go see it? Yet Thelma and Louise you had debates going on in the newspapers of the United States, “is this a bad trend?” It was similar to the outcry about Lorena Bobbitt. What’s happened is because violence has been gendered masculine we think it’s unusual only when women do it. When men do it, it is so normal that its masculine character is unremarkable. In fact, it’s invisible. So one of the things we have to do is to make it visible. Feminist scholars and activists have been trying to do this for years, but they’ve been largely ignored. Making masculinity visible is the first step to understanding how it operates in the culture and how definitions of manhood have been linked to dominance and control. [Machine gun shots and screaming as the next section of the video “Upping the ante” begins. Imani gets up and goes over to shut the video off] 109. Imani: Ok. [Video continues to play] 168 110. JACKSON KATZ: Many cultural analysts would argue that if you want to understand the meaning of something [video is cut off] 111. Imani: [After turning off the video, the instructor begins to talk as she walks back to the front of the room behind the computer podium] So, let’s take a minute. Get your thoughts together, umm, around masculinity. There were a couple of things that came up for me. One, he, this notion of the invisibility of masculinity, and, secondly, this notion that violence ha-, he just said this at the end, violence has been gendered masculine. Alright, so I want to kind of be there, I wanted us to pause there at those two places. And a question that arose for me, umm, this video, I looked it up because I couldn’t remember but it was created in 1999, so when you think about that contextually it’s about ni-, it’s nine years old, and so I wanted to ask you all, how ha-, this is about masculinity being constru-, socially constructed as very violent, right? And, and that violence being perpetrated against whom? [Several students with overlapping responses of “women”] 112. Imani: Women. So the question that came up for me was how have the images of women changed over time? [Jane raises her hand] Jane, go ahead 113. Jane: I think, I think in some ways it’s, it’s worse. And it’s not only in movies anymore, like you have video games, like you have Grand Theft Auto where they pick up prostitutes and then they [indistinguishable] to kill them 114. Imani: Mmm hmm 115. Jane: I don’t think it’s necessarily just movies, I think it’s kind of moved out 116. Imani: All kinds of media 117. Jane: To other things, even though it’s still in movies 169 118. Imani: Mmm hmm, so video games as well, but still portraying men in that, uh, machismo as violent 119. Jane: Yeah 120. Imani: And violence against women 121. Jane: Mmm hmm 122. Imani: Umm, other comments, other thoughts? [Period of silence] 123. Imani: Nobody? Monica go ahead [Monica seems caught off guard] 124. Researcher: [aside] This is the only time so far in these class sessions that Imani has called on a student without their hand raised. This is very uncommon from what I observed over the course of the semester in her class. This is often because there are many students willing and eager to speak. However, it remains notable that the instructor would call on Monica at this time. Does it speak to her relationship with that particular student? Was there a facial expression or non-verbal that I could not see that evoked this? Is it related to the uncommon silence prior to this? Definitely a cause for raising some important questions. 125. Mary: [aside] Perhaps this is an attempt by the instructor to balance the participation of women and men in the class session. As evidenced in the previous scene, the men in the classroom appear to be dominating the space and time in the classroom, participating at a higher rate proportional to their presence in the class. Calling on a woman to respond to this question when there was a pause in the active participation of students could be 170 evidence that the instructor is aware of and working to correct the imbalance in student responses. 126. Monica: I don’t know [laughs] I mean what do you… [indistinguishable] 127. Laura: Can you repeat your…[trailing off, indistinguishable] 128. Monica: Yeah, can you repeat the question? 129. Imani: I mean it could be other thoughts that you have, but I do want us to think about, I’m trying to get at something about femininity as well, but I don’t, u-, wanna jump from femininity, between femininity and masculinity, so we can stay on masculinity a few more minutes. 130. Monica: I agree with her, but at the same time, umm, you do see like more women being portrayed as violent now 131. Imani: Mmm hmm [walks around to the right of the computer podium and leans on her left elbow, her left hand up at her chin and her right arm crossed across her torso, as she continues to listen] 132. Monica: Than you ever did in the past. Like movies, like, uh, “Mr. and Mrs. Smith” 133. Imani: Mmm hmm [motions her left hand forward toward Monica] 134. Monica: Like 135. Marcus: Kill Bill [Imani looks over at Marcus and motions with her left hand toward him, nodding her head] 136. Monica: Angelina Jolie was kicking his butt just as long as he was throwing her around 137. Imani: Mmm hmm 138. Monica: And, like, movies like “The Terminator,” they got like a evil woman that’s killin’ everybody 171 139. Imani: Mmm hmm, mmm hmmm [Imani walks over to the video equipment area to get the DVD out and put it back in its case and then walks back to the right of the computer podium. Christopher raises his hand in the middle of Monica’s next line] 140. Monica: Evil robots and stuff, so like women are n-, starting to be more portrayed as bein’ violent, but at the same time, movies like “Grand Theft Auto,” which I play all the time, you go around finding prostitutes or other movies where it’s just like, I don’t know, women is portrayed as the se-duc-tress [said hesitantly] 141. Cheryl: Seductress? 142. Monica: Yeah, yeah, the object 143. Imani: Like the seductress or the object, right, yeah, umm “Kill Bill” [motions toward Marcus] is another example. And I think that’s where I was trying to go. I’m sure we could identify films that now have really reshaped the, the, the portrait of femininity as well, right? This kinda tough, violent woman, ya know, who also shoots up, and as he was saying back in the early 90’s, you had “Thelma and Louise,” but you also had, umm, [pause] what is the Queen Latifah movie? [Multiple overlapping responses mostly audible from Black women saying “Set it Off”] 144. Imani: “Set it Off,” I mean that for me was like, that was the first movie where it was like, “Ok, a group of women, they’re gonna rob a bank?” And they’re tough they’re hard, and again that was in that same time period as “Thelma and Louise,” so you, you saw kinda in the 90’s this movement, ah, mid- to late 90’s to now, as you say, women they, they’re just as violent. Shootin’ up folks, and, you know doin’ 145. Laura: Like every Angelia Jolie movie 172 146. Imani: Angelina Jolie does it very well [Student laughter and side conversations begin] 147. Imani: “Tomb Raider,” I mean, all these kinds of movies [adjusts her bra strap or shirt at her right shoulder] 148. Alice: [aside] Here is another example of how the instructor opens a small window into her own experience as an African American woman. While the video points to the film “Thelma and Louise” starring two White women, Imani brings into the discussion “Set it Off” (with the help of some of the Black women in the class) starring four Black actresses. As a result, we see the unique experience of the instructor as an African American woman more familiar with and impacted by the memory of seeing a movie starring Queen Latifah. And, the resonance with the African American women in her classroom again show us the particular relationship she is able to build with these students who share life experiences based on both gender and race. 149. Judith: [aside] Also, it is very important to see the ways that these examples of “violent” women allow us to explore changing and complex relationships related to power and identity. Positing that women are “just as violent” as men, however, can overlook and ignore some of the specific relations of power that operate within discourses of gender and violence. Asking questions like, “What kinds of violent acts are people portrayed perpetrating?” and “What are the images of men and women who are violent?” can support a more intricate analysis. Further, looking even at the words used can expand the discussion more. To refer to women as seductresses invokes certain amounts of power alongside the objectification and implications of promiscuity. 173 150. Mary: [aside] Yes, and the implications of statements that position women as the same as men in any regard can be dangerous. Although gains have been made in regards to equality between the genders, there has been significant backlash against the feminist movements’ impacts on society. Beginning to look at women and men as equal prematurely is devastating to the progress that has, and must still be, made. The invisibility of sexism, even to women, that pervades our society is evident here. [Side conversations continue. Christopher has his hand raised still. Marcus also raises his hand] 151. Imani: [After calling on the next student, the instructor works on the laptop and moves around the front of the room to set up the next video as he is speaking] Go ahead, Christopher 152. Christopher: Umm, in my criminal justice class we actually talked about this before and [indistinguishable] there’s, uh, a rise in statistics as far as, uh, crimes committed by women that kind of comes with, uh, women being like more accepted into, into, you know, mainstream society. Women are having big CEO jobs 153. Imani: Mmm hmm 154. Christopher: Like as soon as they get into the, uh, you know, the positions that men usually held, you know, in, in ‘Corporate America,’ or just America period, it seems like their violent tendencies come out, too 155. Imani: That’s right 156. Christopher: So it’s kinda, you know, interrelated in that way 157. Imani: Well, and, and not just violence, I mean how else is femininity portrayed? You know, as you think about ‘Corporate America,’ [Cheryl raises her hand and then puts it 174 back down as Imani continues to talk] there are various ways in which to be feminine, right? Umm, but when we think about femininity, what’s our, what are our fir-, what are the first words that come to mind for us? 158. Rasheena: Like in, you talkin’ ‘bout in the workplace? 159. Imani: No, in the, in general, in society 160. Cheryl: Soft spoken 161. Imani: Soft spoken 162. Nikki: Passive 163. Imani: Passive, mmm hmm 164. Cheryl: Dainty, emotional 165. Imani: Emotional, dainty. I mean, why are those our [snaps her fingers with her right hand] first images, right? Because historically, over time, that’s how women were supposed to be. 166. Mary: [aside] Yes, inviting students to reflect upon what comes to mind when they think about femininity is an extension of the stereotypes exercise facilitated by the instructor in the previous class period. These gender roles for women can be extremely limiting and are still pervasive in our society, as evidenced by the students responses, “soft spoken,” “passive,” “dainty,” and “emotional” all contributed by women in this classroom. 167. Imani: But then, when we think about the workplace, what are some other portraits of women, and of femininity, that we see? 168. Rasheena: Strong 169. Imani: Strong 170. Ashlee: Confident 171. Imani: Confident 175 172. Summer: Smart 173. Timothy: Powerful 174. Marcus: Combative 175. Imani: Smart. What? 176. Marcus: Combative 177. Imani: Combative, powerful, you know, so, and those traits are typically associated with who? [Multiple overlapping responses of “men”] 178. Imani: Men, so I’m just trying to get you to think about the norms that you’re supposed to subscribe to, but then how they’re variations of how we perform these identities. 179. Judith: [aside] Indeed. It is important to highlight the variations in gender performance. The students in this class appear to recognize the shifts and changes in the performance of femininity based on context and circumstance. However, it is also necessary to speak to the implications of women taking on so-called masculine traits. Although the performance of gender on the part of women has changed, there are still consequences for these transgressions. 180. Mary: [aside] Yes, the negative impacts on women who choose to take on masculine ways of being, in the workplace or in general, are numerous. The differential ways that women are treated and spoken about for demonstrating the same types of behaviors as men typically exhibit are astounding. It is not uncommon for a man with a strong and firm management style to be called influential while a woman exhibiting the same characteristics would be referred to as bossy (or worse). Even in the responses given by the 176 students in this class, we hear Marcus use the term “combative” which is less likely to be used to describe a powerful businessman. 181. And, so then let’s now bring that back to schooling, right? And, in particular, urban schooling. Do we see these different depictions of masculinity and femininity in urban schools? [Brief period of silence] 182. Imani: What do you all think? 183. Monica: Girls fight 184. Imani: What? 185. Monica: I said girls fight. Girls fight more than boys [Overlapping comments by students – audible comments: yeah, yeah they do] 186. Imani: You think so? [Moving in front of the table with her hands behind her back, nodding her head] [Continued student comments – audible comment: it’s worse, yeah] 187. Imani: Ok. What else? [Cheryl raises her hand] 188. Timothy: [Speaks without being called on] Girls rip, girls rip hair out and like [indistinguishable] too. Boys don’t rip hair, they just, they just hit [Student and instructor laughter as student continues comment. Imani stops in front of computer podium and faces the back of the room with her hands still held behind her back. Ashlee raises her hand. Cheryl’s hand is still raised. Timothy speaks again without raising his hand or being called on. Cheryl lowers her and and Ashlee keeps hers raised] 189. Timothy: Girls are like rippin’ hair and scratchin’ and… 177 190. Imani: Yes, ok, Ashlee [Moves some computer cords out of the way with her foot and then begins to walk back to the middle of the front of the room] 191. Ashlee: Well in schools, I went to a like an all girls Catholic high school 192. Imani: That’s right. Mmm hmm 193. Ashlee: So, umm, like it was really weird, there was fights all the time with girls 194. Imani: Mmm hmm [Nodding her head] 195. Ashlee: Like in the halls and everything, and it was just really catty 196. Imani: Mmm hmm 197. Ashlee: And really like 198. Imani: [Uses air quotes still nodding] Catty that’s a word [Student laughter] 199. Imani: No, it’s, it’s a word [Continued student laughter] 200. Ashlee: And they, it was really like, I mean, boys it’s always just punch punch punch [Cheryl raises her hand again] 201. Imani: Right [Still nodding her head and smiling, now standing more toward the right front of the room with her hands still held behind her back] 202. Ashlee: With girls it’s like, “You’re this, you’re this, you’re this,” and like 203. Imani: Mmm hmm, mmm hmm 204. Ashlee: It’s more, I think, like, [hesitantly] emotional 205. Imani: Mmm hmm, yeah 206. Ashlee: rather than physical 207. Imani: Ok, ok, alright. 178 208. Mary: [aside] Although there is a difference in the amount of school violence engaged in by girls in recent years, there is still a significant gap between the amount and types of violence perpetrated by boys over that of girls. Further, it is striking how even in this discussion of violence that gender stereotypes that create an image of girls and women as “emotional” are still prevalent. 209. Judith: [aside] It is notable how the discourses around stereotypes and gender roles pervade the perceptions of and descriptions of violent acts by students in U.S. urban schools. Although the students appear to be speaking from their own experiences, it is unlikely that these experiences have not been filtered through the discourses around who boys and girls are expected to be and how they are expected to show up in schools and society. And, despite that, these comments also overlook the large number of students, of all genders, who do not engage in school violence at all, including (my assumption) most of the students here in this classroom. 210. Imani: So, s-, yes, go ahead Cheryl. [Motions with her left hand toward Cheryl and then walks a few steps to her left toward where Cheryl is seated] 211. Cheryl: I was gonna even say earlier like with the, umm, wo-, women being more portrayed as like sexual predators 212. Imani: Mmm hmm [Nods her head] 213. Cheryl: Like, even in schools, like when, when a male, when a female teacher would like sexually, uh 214. Imani: [Overlapping] Oh 215. Cheryl: Like assault 216. Imani: Assault [Nods her head] 179 217. Cheryl: Like a young man or 218. Imani: Uh huh, uh huh 219. Cheryl: Young woman in the class. And the depiction of like that usually is like a male thing that happens, you know 220. Imani: Right 221. Cheryl: In a, in a school setting, but more women are being… [trailing off] 222. Imani: [Overlapping] More female teachers are, that’s what you’re referring to 223. Cheryl: Well, you know, teachers are being like brought to the forefront… 224. Imani: [overlapping] Mmm hmm, mmm hmm 225. Cheryl: [overlapping] …sexual assault… 226. Imani: And, it’s interesting to think about, umm, yeah high school, middle school, I mean some of those boys are like 7th grade, you know, 7th, 8th grade. [Walks back toward the middle of the front of the room and then stops facing the back of the room and begins talking with her hands] And it’s interesting to think about how those cases get talked about. I mean, in some ways, it’s kinda like it’s a cool thing that the boy was, you know, able to get to the female, get with the female teacher. [Rhonda’s hand is raised mid-way through the previous comments by the instructor] 227. Rasheena: Yeah [along with other similar overlapping responses] 228. Imani: Now, those tables were flipped, think about the way a male teacher would be, like, abused 229. Marcus: Mmm hmm [along with other similar overlapping responses by students] 230. Imani: in the media in a very severe way versus that female teacher. I mean, just the way those cases get talked about are very different. And, both are wrong 180 231. Marcus: Mmm hmm 232. Imani: But, again, it’s that gendered aspect of the sexual assault. Assault, right? [Uses air quotes the second time she says the word assault] 233. Marcus: Mmm hmm 234. Imani: It’s called assault even if it’s consensual. [Indistinguishable student comments that seem to agree with what the instructor is saying] 235. Imani: So, there was another hand, Rhonda [Walks around behind the computer podium as Rhonda begins to speak] 236. Rhonda: Yeah, I was, that was what I was about to say, like, it’s weird, cuz I know like a couple years ago this one lady, she was in a relationship with some boy or somethin’ 237. Imani: [Listening with both hands on the base of the computer podium by the laptop] Mmm hmm 238. Rhonda: And, like, like it was ok, like I don’t understand why when it’s a young student, when it’s a male student 239. Imani: [Fixing the right shoulder of her shirt and/or bra strap] Mmm hmm 240. Rhonda: and it’s a female teacher, like, like it’s kinda like he getting’ props like, “Oh, you know, she 241. Imani: [Fixing the left shoulder of her shirt and/or bra strap] Right 242. Rhonda: such and such older than you and duh duh duh duh duh,” but when it’s a 243. Imani: Mmm hmm 244. Rhonda: girl, it’s like all traumatizing for her 245. Imani: Mmm hmm 246. Rhonda: and stuff like that 181 247. Imani: [Talking with her left hand] Mmm hmm, so again, even in the way in society we talk about sexual promiscuity, or re-, sexual relationships between men and women, or men and children, and women and children, are very different, right? And, so, in a lot of ways, uh, sexual activity is gendered, and we’ll get into some of that in a minute. 248. Judith: [aside] This topic, again, raises poignant complexities related to power relations and relationships among and between sex, gender, and sexuality. There is great complexity with the issues related to sexual and/or romantic relationships between students and teachers. Some of what was named here highlights the gendered discourses that approve or disprove certain relationships within our society. Again, however, the tendency to make broad and sweeping generalizations about the men, women, boys and girls within these relationships and society’s stance or reaction can be problematic on many levels and serve to reinforce certain gendered power relations related to the binary system of gender (such as male dominance and the prowess of a male child being in a sexual relationship with an adult female teacher). 249. Mary: [aside] Agreed. It is necessary to explore why these differences in how we view and talk about dating and/or sexual relationships between teachers and students exist. In addition to the maintenance of male dominance by showing less criticism for male students in relationships with female teachers, with the history of men preying on women and girls in our society as a demonstration of male dominance, it is less threatening to society as a whole for a female teacher to date a male student, despite the inappropriateness of the behavior on the parts of male and female teachers alike. 250. Alice: [aside] These are all very important topics, but was the question related to masculinity and femininity in urban schools really answered here? I was eager to see how 182 this section of the class period would go and don’t feel that the question was adequately addressed and therefore leaves open-ended the exploration of the intersections of race, gender and social class. And, I would argue, another example of the invisibility and marginalization of the experiences of people of color of all genders, social classes, and identity characteristics. Scene 2: Hidden: A Gender – Reflections This was another jam-packed scene where so many issues were raised and there is so much that can be talked about. My hope is that you are beginning to understand, and perhaps even imagine, the perspectives and topics that Alice, Mary and Judith find interesting and noteworthy, as well as the distinctions between their viewpoints on gender issues within and beyond this classroom. From the casual conversation and interactions that occurred during the time it took the instructor to set up the video through to the discussion of the video we continue to see the multiple ways to view and interpret what is taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course. Mary continues to point out and explore how gender bias and sexism exist on many levels and contexts. Starting within the more informal conversations prior to the start of the video clip, Mary comments on the interaction between Timothy and Imani related to the discussion of her daughter’s picture being displayed on the projection screen. Mary interprets Timothy’s comments about Imani’s daughter working at McDonald’s as an attempt to undermine the instructor’s authority in the classroom. Within the discussion following the video, Mary responds to the comments related to the amount and types of violence perpetrated by men, women, boys and girls within schools and society. Mary refutes the argument by the instructor and the students that there is just as much violence enacted by men and women. She states that 183 although the types and amount of violence committed by women have shifted that the overwhelming majority of violence is still committed by men. Further, she argues that inferring that there is any “sameness” across genders within society overlooks ongoing and serious gender bias and discrimination. Even the changes in roles for girls and women that see an increase in masculine behaviors and characteristics comes at a high cost to girls and women as they are often criticized for asserting more power and control over their lives and their environments. Finally, Mary’s response to the discussion about the inappropriateness of sexual relationships between teachers and their students again demonstrates her perspectives about the pervasive sexism within schools and society. Mary points out the ways that accounts of relationships between female teachers and male students reinforce male dominance. Alice directs us to examine how and where gender is, and often is not, explored through stories related to race, social class, among other aspects of identity. Most notable to Alice are the ways the instructor and students continue to relate across issues of identity and experience. Within the beginning part of this scene we again see the powerful dynamics of interaction between the instructor and the students in more informal ways. Alice highlights the openness and transparency of Imani as she shares about her daughter with the students providing a window into her lived experience as a woman and mother outside of the classroom. Within this interaction Alice also takes note of the grace and style with which Imani responds to Timothy’s comment about her daughter potentially working at McDonald’s, a powerful portrait of standing in her power against a blatantly racist comment (whether or not it was intended to be so). Alice offers that extending the discussion with the whole class to overtly include issues of gender, race and social class could have enhanced the impact and increased student awareness of the intersections of these identity characteristics. As Alice notes, however, there is a real potential 184 cost to taking a more direct approach as an instructor who is a woman of color. All too often the course evaluation process can provide an opportunity for students to freely criticize their instructors based on issues of gender and race in ways that could harm their employment or tenure process. Other aspects of this scene Alice take note of include another exchange that brings the instructor’s identity as an African American woman to the forefront and the discussion of masculinity and femininity in urban schools. Within the discussion of the video, Imani makes reference to the movie “Set It Off.” According to Alice, the interaction surrounding this comment is yet another demonstration of the way her students, especially the black women, can relate more easily to her as an instructor through shared lived experiences. This reality is made even clearer by the fact that Imani cannot remember the name of the film and after naming the main actress, Queen Latifah, is able to draw it from her students to illustrate her point about the portrayal of gendered violence in the media. As the discussion of the video continues, the instructor asks the question, “Do we see these different depictions of masculinity and femininity in urban schools?” This question is of particular interest to Alice because it connects with the stories and experiences of students and teachers at the intersections of race, gender, and social class identities. Unfortunately, the discussion never quite answers the question as posed by the instructor, which to Alice is another missed opportunity to enhance this conversation about gender and education. Judith continues to show us how to question and craft our curiosities about power relations in multiple situations, circumstances, relationships, interactions and discourses of gender and education within this scene. As with the other two women, Judith also takes interest and adds her commentary to the informal interactions between the students and the instructor 185 while she sets up the video. Judith observes that the way Imani jokes with Timothy in response to his comments about her daughter is a strategy to assert power over the situation to make the point that his comments are inappropriate without calling him out in a more direct and confrontational way. Judith sees the employment of power and positionality through the use of humor and joking around emerging as a pattern to watch. In this scene Judith also challenges us to critically examine the ways that our individual and collective discourses about gender, sex and sexuality serve to maintain and promote the very norms of gender that are perceived to be restrictive. Within the class discussions prior to and including this scene there appears to be an awareness of the constraints of normative gender roles within the binary system of gender. However, in the same conversations, there is an inclination toward the stereotypical characterizations of gender. Judith highlights in particular the very broad statements made about violence perpetrated by women and girls being more emotional whereas violent acts committed by boys and men are considered more physical. Both Ashlee and Timothy talk about girls engaging in violence such as ripping hair or being “catty,” whereas boys would just hit or punch each other. Ashlee specifically talked about her belief that girls’ violence as more “emotional rather than physical.” These types of sweeping generalizations serve to render invisible the complexities that exist within individual instances of violence, as well as add to commentary about “all” people of a particular gender identity as if there is a static and unchanging way for example to be a girl that inherently includes participating in emotional acts of violence. These are the ideas and interactions that stood out for Mary, Alice and Judith. And, I’m sure there is even more that they could have commented on and discussed further. What about you? How do you see issues of gender bias and discrimination being highlighted within the 186 content, the teacher moves and/or the student moves? What about the interrelationships between race, gender and social class and the stories and experiences at these intersections that are brought forward? In what ways do you see gender being performed, or talked about in ways that extend beyond the binary system of gender? As we move into the next scene, I encourage you to try on one or more of the perspectives to see if you’re getting the hang of it! To me, what we have seen thus far is a dazzling display of the ways that issues of gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course are embedded, embodied, and evoked at every turn. Let’s get back to the classroom to explore even more! Scene 3: Killing Us Softly 3 – Guiding Questions This next scene brings us another video clip and the discussion about what is raised in the video. Interrogating the three locations (student moves, teacher moves and course content) give us innumerable opportunities to apply and understand more deeply the womanist perspective highlighted by Alice, the postmodern feminist perspective added by Judith, and the liberal feminist perspective demonstrated by Mary. Each of the three women offers us opportunities to recognize and reflect upon the ways in which issues of gender and education are being woven into each aspect of this multicultural teacher education class experience. And, the obvious engagement by the students in this particular activity urges us to look closely at the issues of gender and education brought forth by this video and their impact on the instructor and the students, as well as the future students of this teacher educator and these teacher candidates. Liberal Feminism (Mary) 1. Why do you think the students in this class were so interested and engaged in watching this video clip? 2. In what ways do you think that women contribute to the perpetuation of sexism? 187 3. How does viewing systems of oppression as unchangeable maintain those systems? 4. Do you think that when women perform their gender and sexual identities in stereotypical ways that they are inviting oppression and/or violence? Womanism (Alice) 1. In what ways are women of color differently depicted in the media according to Jean Kilbourne? 2. In what ways do you see the instructor’s conversation at the beginning of this class session about the Ebony Fashion Fair as relevant to the discussion of the “Killing Us Softly 3” video clip? Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 1. In what ways do you see the concepts of gender, sex and sexuality being confused and/or conflated? Scene 3: Killing Us Softly 3 – Script [At the front of the classroom between the computer podium and the projection screen, Imani transitions quickly from the previous class discussion to the next activity on her agenda for the day] 1. Imani: I wanted to kind of show the flip side of the, uh, “Tough Guise” focuses on, uh, masculinity, and it was created, or produced, in ’99, but there’s another video called, “Killing Us Softly,” and it focuses on this objectification of women, umm, etc. And I wanted to show th-, I, I was able to pull it up on ‘You Tube.’ I hope this is the same version that, umm, I’ve seen, and I’m not gonna show 34 minutes of it, but I want you to get the flip side, umm, and think about, I really like this video, how this woman shows us, umm, I’m just gonna show a small clip. But in your spare time, which you have so much of… 188 [Student laughter and comments overlapping – audible responses: ha, right, etc.] 2. Imani: You can [laughing], you can google it yourself and, umm, watch the “Killing Us Softly.” And I think this is probably the pl-, the sound is gonna play on my laptop, so we might have to listen intently, we’ll see. [Quiet as instructor sets up video with a couple indistinguishable side conversations, however mostly quiet for the short while the video is set up and begins. The instructor puts her laptop up on the back of the computer podium. The audio for video begins.] 3. Imani: [Walking to the back of the classroom] That’s too low, right? [Imani opens the door of the classroom, pokes her head out and then returns quickly holding the door open for a student technology aide who she talks with briefly in the doorway. He walks to the computer podium, and the instructor follows shortly, to set up the audio for the video to play through the room’s sound system. Once it’s all set up, he leaves and the instructor puts the laptop back on the podium, adjusts the volume, and sets the video to full-screen mode] 4. Imani: [aside] This video was introduced to me by a graduate student instructor of the course during this year’s orientation. I am looking forward to giving it a try with my students this semester for the first time. 5. JEAN KILBOURNE: Many years ago I saw an ad that changed my life. At the time I had a mindless job putting ads into a medical journal and one of them was for birth control pills called Ovulen 21, and the ad said "Ovulen 21 works the way a woman thinks – by weekdays, not by cycle days." And the smiling woman as you can see has boxes in her head and each box represents a day of the week. So Monday is washing day. Tuesday is ironing day. Now this was a long time ago, but I knew there was something wrong with this ad. I 189 couldn't exactly say what it was but I knew there was something wrong. I took it home and I put it with a magnet on my refrigerator. And then I began to collect other ads and put them up on the refrigerator too. So, soon I had a collage of ads up there and as friends would come over they'd say "what's this?" and I'd say "well you tell me" and we began looking at these images. And I started to see a pattern in the pictures, a kind of statement about what it means to be a woman in this culture. But I became very interested in the whole subject of beauty, and of the image, of how much power it gives young women, but how short lived and unfulfilling it ultimately is. And I kept collecting ads. In 1979 I made my first film Killing Us Softly, which is still shown through out the world, and in 1987 I remade it as Still Killing Us Softly. Now here we are at the beginning of the new millennium. I want to look at what I said in those earlier films and see what's changed and what's stayed the same. [Imani walks to the back of the classroom and then across the room to shut the lights off and then walks back behind the computer podium, pulls the chair aside again and sits down behind the computer podium. She watches the video from the side and periodically moves around and looks at various papers] 6. JEAN KILBOURNE: In the original Killing Us Softly I said I would be asking of you something that no one has ever asked before, and that is to take advertising seriously. These days we do take advertising more seriously. Advertising has increased from a $20 billion a year to a $180 billion a year industry. The average American is exposed to over 3000 ads every single day and will spend three years of his or her life watching television commercials, just the commercials. 190 The ads, as you know, are everywhere. They're on radio, television, newspapers, magazines, billboards, bumper stickers. Here one company brags about its ability to put advertising "in your face all over the place." There's more advertising than ever before. And at the same time everyone in America still feels personally exempt from the influence of advertising. So wherever I go, what I hear more than anything else is "I don't pay attention to ads, I just tune them out. They have no effect on me." Now I hear this most often from people wearing GAP T-shirts, but that's another story. It certainly is true, in fact it's more true than ever that advertising is the foundation of the mass media. The primary purpose of the mass media is to sell products. Advertising does sell products of course, but it also sells a great deal more than products. It sells values, it sells images, it sells concepts of love and sexuality, of romance, of success, and perhaps most important of normalcy. To a great extent, advertising tells us who we are and who we should be. What does advertising tell us today about women? It tells us just as it did ten, and twenty, and thirty years ago that what's most important about women is how we look. The first thing the advertisers do is surround us with the image of ideal female beauty. So we all learn how important it is for a woman to be beautiful and exactly what it takes. Women learn from a very early age that we must spend enormous amounts of time, energy, and above all money striving to achieve this ideal and feeling ashamed and guilty when we fail. And failure is inevitable because the ideal is based on absolute flawlessness. She never has any lines or wrinkles. She certainly has no scars or blemishes. Indeed, she has no pores. If anything, this ideal image has become far more impossibly perfect in recent years through the magic of computer retouching. Computers can do many things. For starters, 191 they can alter a photograph to make it perfect. According to this magazine cover, Michelle Pfeiffer needs absolutely nothing. Well, not quite according to the bill from the retouching company that describes all the work that they had to do to make her acceptable for this cover such as “clean up complexion”, “soften eye lines”, “trim chin”, “remove neck lines.” In addition to retouching photographs of real women, computers can create women who do not exist. A Mirabella cover featured parts of different women's faces: one woman's lips, another's eyes, another's nose, combined to form the perfect face. Recently a computer graphics company introduced a totally computer generated model. Not a still image, but a moving image that looks like a real person. Soon we won't need real models at all and the ideal image will be more impossible than ever before. This wouldn't matter so much if it didn't connect with the core belief of American culture that such transformation is possible; that we can look like this if we just try hard enough, buy the right products. If we're not beautiful, or thin, or rich, or successful, it's because we're just not trying hard enough. And the research is clear that this ideal image does affect women's self esteem, and it also influences how men feel about the real women they are with. And women's bodies are still, in fact perhaps more than ever, turned into objects, into things. And of course this has very serious consequences. For one thing it creates a climate in which there is widespread and increasing violence against women. Here she's become the bottle of alcohol with the label branded on her stomach. Now I'm not at all saying that an ad like this directly causes violence. It's not that simple, but it is part of a cultural climate in which women are seen as things, as objects, and certainly turning a human being into a thing is almost always the first step toward justifying violence against that person. We see this with racism, we see it with homophobia. It's always the same process. We 192 think of the person as less than human and violence becomes inevitable. And that step is already taken with women. So the violence, the abuse, is partly the chilling but logical result of this kind of objectification. Now this is a problem for all women of course, but particularly women of color who are often literally shown as animals, dressed in leopard skins and animal prints. Over and over again the real message is "not fully human." 7. Alice: [aside] Understanding the ways that women of color are uniquely depicted within the media is such an important and insightful addition to this video. Like with the “Tough Guise” video, it is crucial to examine the ways that stories of people related to gender, race, and other aspects of identity can offer us insight about their experiences and impact our understandings and discourses. Recognizing discourses and norms at the intersections of multiple identity characteristics can inform us about people’s lived experiences. Women of color being shown as animals and/or in animal costumes or animal printed clothing no doubt impacts the images that these women have of themselves, as well influence their relationships and professional opportunities, to name a few arenas. 8. JEAN KILBOURNE: Ten years ago even the advertisers acknowledged this in an editorial that they put in Advertising Age, their major publication: "Clearly it's time to wipe out sexism in beer ads, for the brewers and their agencies to wake up and join the rest of America in realizing that sexism, sexual harassment, and the cultural portrayal of women in advertising are inextricably linked." So here the advertisers are saying yes we sell more than products, yes the images in our lives affect the reality of our lives, and how could they not? 193 Women's bodies continue to be dismembered in advertising. Over and over again just one part of the body is used to sell products, which is of course the most dehumanizing thing you can do to someone. Not only is she a thing, but just one part of that thing is focused on. Most often the focus is on breasts since we are a culture that is certainly obsessed with breasts, and breasts are used to sell absolutely everything: "The most dependable fishing line in the world." [Student laughter] 9. JEAN KILBOURNE: Women are constantly told we must change our lives by increasing our breast size and the stakes are high: "Does your husband wish you had larger breasts?" And if he does the implication is very clear: you better change your body, as opposed to changing your husband. [Student laughter. Instructor stands up during the next line in the film clip] 10. JEAN KILBOURNE: Twenty years ago we were told to use creams and breast developers that were of course completely worthless. In ads like this: "I really wanted a fuller bust line for summer." One wonders what she is supposed to do in the fall. [Student laughter] 11. JEAN KILBOURNE: And then we were told to wear uplifting bras such as the Wonder Bra, and others: “If you've got it flaunt it, and if you don't, create it." Now imagine if men were supposed to play this game: "Wonder jock. The strap for the bulge you've always wanted." [Loud student and instructor laughter] 12. JEAN KILBOURNE: But nowadays we're supposed to have plastic surgery: "Breast implants. The most important decision I ever made was choosing my spouse. The second 194 my plastic surgeon." Most women who have had breast implants lose sensations in their breasts. So their breasts become an object of someone else's pleasure rather than pleasurable in themselves. The woman literally moves from being a subject to an object. And yet we all learn very early on that our breasts are never OK the way they are. "Your breasts may be too big, too saggy, too pert, too flat, too full, too far apart, too close together, too A cup, too lopsided, too jiggly, too pale, too padded, too pointy, too pendulous, or just two mosquito bites. But with DEP Styling Products at least you can have your hair the way you want it." [Student and instructor laughter] 13. JEAN KILBOURNE: Now imagine being a young girl looking at an ad like this. It's clear from the copy that your breasts can never be OK. And the research indicates that the self-esteem of girls in America plummets when they reach adolescence. This doesn't happen to boys but it does to girls. Girls tend to feel fine about themselves when they're eight, nine, ten years old, but they hit adolescence and they hit a wall. And certainly part of that wall is this terrible emphasis on physical perfection. Men's bodies are rarely dismembered in advertising; more than they used to be, but this ad was so shocking that the ad itself got national media coverage. It's a good thing it got some coverage I suppose. [Student laughter] 14. JEAN KILBOURNE: Reporters called me up from all around the country and said, "Look. They're doing the same thing to men they've always done to women." Well, not quite. They'd be doing the same thing to men they've always done to women if there were copy that went this ad that went like this: "Your penis may be too small, too droopy, too limp, too 195 lopsided, too narrow, too fat, too jiggly, too pale, too pointy, too blunt, or just two inches. But at least you can have a great pair of jeans." [Loud student and instructor laughter during the entire quote above, especially at the beginning and after “or just two inches”] 15. JEAN KILBOURNE: And believe me this is not the kind of equality I'm fighting for. I don't want them to do this to men anymore than I do to women, but I think we can learn something from these two ads, one of which did happen and one of which never would. And what they show us very vividly is that men and women inhabit very different worlds. Men basically don't live in a world in which their bodies are routinely scrutinized, criticized, and judged whereas women do. [Instructor stops the video] 16. Peter: Do we have to stop? [Other indistinguishable student comments and side conversations] 17. Ashlee: This is so interesting 18. Mary: [aside] The engagement of the students in watching this film strongly supports all of my arguments about the perpetuation of gender bias and inequality within society. If there was not resonance with the students’ experiences, I would highly doubt that they would be interested in seeing, and wanting to continue to watch, this video. I am certain that the women of this classroom are all too familiar with the ways in which women are objectified and scrutinized within and beyond the media. I am eager to hear the discussion of this video and to witness the students’ reactions and responses. [Side conversations continue as instructor talks] 196 19. Imani: [While she is talking she walks a bit and then heads toward the light switches stopping and going back behind the computer podium when she realizes that Cheryl gets up to turn the lights on] It’s very interesting, and that’s why I wanted to stop it there and then, if you’re intrigued, Google it and finish, she’s very good, umm, finish watching the rest of it. But I wanna get some comments about what you learned from just seeing those clips about, umm, you know, the ways in which men and women are depi-, uh, c-, uh, s-, socially constructed, depicted differently in our society, and the role advertising plays in that. [Rasheena raises her hand] Rasheena 20. Rasheena: I think they think that it’s normal for them to do that to women, and 21. Imani: They who? 22. Rasheena: The media 23. Imani: The, ok, the advertisers 24. Rasheena: Yeah 25. Imani: [Walks away from Rasheena as she is speaking and begins to set up the next video for the class] Mmm hmm 26. Rasheena: It’s like everybody think that it’s normal to, you know, talk about [indistinguishable] “her breasts is too small,” when women, like, we actually internalize these things 27. Imani: Mmm hmm 28. Rasheena: And we actually try to… Society tells us this is how we’re ‘posed to look, so we try to do all these things to look like what really don’t exist at all, so… 29. Imani: Mmm hmm, mmm hmm, yeah. Someone else? [Monica raises her hand] What’d you learn from this clip? Yeah, Monica. 197 30. Monica: It, it makes me look at advertising a whole different way, like, what, what she was saying, I immediately thought about the Tag commercial where it could be, like, no matter what type of dude you are, as soon as you spray Tag it’s like… [Indistinguishable multiple students talking over each other. Peter raises his hand] 31. Imani: Oh, uh huh 32. Monica: It’s like a new one where there’s like a boy who’s say is like chocolate and all the girls rush to him. [Indistinguishable multiple students talking over each other] 33. Monica: So, it’s like gettin’ crazier and crazier as time goes, yeah… [Timothy raises his hand and then lowers it when Peter begins to speak] 34. Imani: Right, right, ok, Peter 35. Peter: Umm, just, just off of, like, that comment, but I mean it’s even stuff that a lot of women subscribe to, like “Cosmo,” even that perpetuates it, I mean 36. Imani: Well, sure 37. Peter: Looking, even, I mean, they even block it in the shelves at Meijer now, they put a little cover in front of it, I mean that stuff is disgusting some of the things [indistinguishable]. ‘Ten best ways to have an orgasm.’ I mean, it’s [Student laughter] 38. Peter: I mean, peop-, people su-, subscribe [indistinguishable] 39. Imani: And buy it, right 40. Peter: Right, so, keeps it going [Cheryl raises her hand mid-way through the instructor’s next line] 198 41. Imani: So we perpetuate, I mean this is a good point that we actually play into the stereotypes and constructions about ourselves. If we continue to subscribe to and support these advertising agencies, then they will just keep producing it. 42. Mary: [aside] This is a classic male rebuttal of sexism. Peter’s comment that women subscribe to magazines like Cosmopolitan and “so, it keeps it going” – the it being sexist images and expectations for women – distracts from and attempts to diminish the overwhelming evidence that women and girls are consistently judged against aesthetic standards of perfection that are unattainable and objectified, harassed, and violated. The power of systems of inequality is such that everyone participates in conscious and unconscious ways. This in no way should minimize the impact of these societal and cultural messages that demean women, whether or not women contribute to them. 43. Judith: [aside] Peter’s reference to a mythological Cosmopolitan headline, “Ten best ways to have an orgasm” is an interesting one to me. There is no clear relationship drawn by Peter that justifies that because women are seeking sexual pleasure that they are participating in their own objectification. One must examine closely what is being said and the implications and assumptions therein. Is this an attempt to subvert a more liberatory expression of women’s sexuality on the part of a white male? 44. Imani: Timothy, did you wanna…? 45. Timothy: The phrase that comes to mind when I think of all this is, ‘Sex sells,’ cuz 46. Imani: Mmm hmm 47. Timothy: I’ve heard that many times before, 48. Imani: That’s right 49. Timothy: And it seems to still be working 199 50. Imani: Mmm hmm 51. Timothy: Cuz they’re all selling their products, so, it’s just the way things are right now 52. Imani: Yup 53. Timothy: And I don’t know 54. Imani: Mmm hmm 55. Timothy: How you reverse that 56. Imani: Mmm hmm 57. Timothy: Or change it 58. Mary: [aside] “It’s just the way things are right now, and I don’t know how you reverse that,” says Timothy about using women’s bodies to sell products because “sex sells.” This is yet another typical reaction from another man. Systematic oppression is often viewed as unchangeable, which unfortunately only serves to perpetuate it. Notice here that the two comments by men do not make any assertions or suggestions related to how these patterns can be interrupted, which in turn maintains their positions of power as men within the systems of sexism and male dominance. 59. Judith: [aside] Timothy’s comment that “sex sells” is an interesting one. As he mentions, “it seems to be working.” This speaks to the probability that there will not be a change in the use of advertising that objectifies women. Not because, as Timothy says, “I don’t know how you reverse that or change it,” but exactly because those in positions to reverse it or change it are not often enough compelled to make different choices and to use their positional power to portray more respectful and realistic images of women. And, our own lives every day we make choices to support, or not, companies and agencies that use these sexualized and dehumanized portrayals of women. It is our own individual and collective 200 responsibility to acknowledge, and change if we wish, our choices that either empower or disempower ourselves, each other, and local and global businesses. 60. Imani: [Walking back to the front of the room] Cheryl [Monica raises and lowers her hand while Cheryl begins to speak] 61. Cheryl: And I think, like, even when women do, like, maybe women being, like especially, ok, Halloween is coming up [Student laughter. Instructor pauses behind the computer podium.] 62. Cheryl: And, like, on campus when, when Halloween comes up, like, the women’s costumes are usually gon-, are gonna be, like, 63. Timothy: High school girls 64. Cheryl: Real provocative 65. Imani: [Standing behind front table with a stack of papers in her right hand] Right, right, mmm hmm 66. Cheryl: But also, I think, even, even if, even if women endorse, or even if women buy into those, like, roles 67. Imani: [Looking through the papers] Mmm hmm [Bethany raises her hand] 68. Cheryl: It still, it doesn’t justify, umm, the att-, the, it doesn’t justify the attention or like the, what could, what could possibly happen to her. So it’s like, I mean like, if, like, that’s a good question to ask, like, if a girl is dressing, like, provocative 69. Imani: [After grabbing one more piece of paper and the chair from behind the computer podium, Imani sits down behind the table at the front of the room listening and nodding her head] Mmm hmm 201 70. Cheryl: And, like, revealing her body, does she deserve what she gets? 71. Imani: Right 72. Cheryl: And like, some people would say, “Yes,” but she really doe-, like, even if she is playing into the 73. Imani: Right 74. Cheryl: Those standards of beauty, she, sh-, she doesn’t deserve the treatment 75. Imani: [Adjusts herself in the seat by lifting herself with two hands up and then back down] Yeah, the violence that’s… [trailing off, indistinguishable] 76. Cheryl: Or the violence could… [trailing off, indistinguishable] [Bethany’s hand is still raised. Laura raises her hand] 77. Imani: Yeah, mmm hmm, no that’s a very good point, umm, 78. Mary: [aside] Yes! Cheryl speaks to a most important fact that girls and women do not deserve to be mistreated regardless of their choices to reveal their bodies. All too often, women are seen as provoking victimization. And, this in some ways responds to the comments made by the two men in the class about women participating in the maintenance and production of sexism. Whether or not women contribute in conscious and unconscious ways to gender inequality does not justify discrimination and violence against women. 79. Imani: [Motioning toward Laura with her hand] Yeah, Laura. [Bethany lowers her hand] 80. Laura: Umm, I was really interested with the comment she made about how, like, if you don’t look this perfect then you’re just not trying hard enough 202 81. Imani: Mmm hmm [Sitting still behind the table with her elbows on the arms of the chair and her hands held together in front of her. During Laura’s next line, Imani adjusts herself in her seat again] 82. Laura: Type thing, just ‘cause if when you think about girls, it seems like no one is just completely happy, like, always striving for like, “oh, no, I’m not gonna have dessert” 83. Imani: [Nodding her head] Mmm hmm 84. Laura: Eat smaller portions, work out and wear makeup 85. Imani: Mmm hmm 86. Laura: Yada yada yada [Student laughter] 87. Imani: [Talking with her hands] And the power in that is, how many of you knew that they actually do all of these alterings to the, the photos? [Several students raise their hands] 88. Aisha: [Speaks without being called on] Photoshop 89. Imani: Yeah, not, the, the people don’t [laugh] look like that for real, umm… 90. Laura: [Overlapping] Have you seen that, “Dove real beauty” You-Tube video? 91. Imani: [Motions with her right hand] Yes, mmm hmmm 92. Laura: [Overlapping] That shows like what they do… [talked over, indistinguishable] 93. Imani: What they do, yes, the “Dove real beauty” video will show you what they actually do, and a lot of women don’t know that, and as Laura was saying, you’re striving and striving to look like that image in the magazine 94. Rhonda: That’s not real [Aisha, Monica and Jane raise their hands during the instructor’s next line] 203 95. Imani: And that image is not real. Even of some of the actresses, right? Showing how Michelle Pfeiffer’s profile was altered. So thinking about what you’re striving for, and I would argue they probably do the same with the male models, and men are constantly trying to achieve this physique that is altered in many of the magazines, that we see. 96. Mary: [aside] Again, the instructor’s comment “they probably do the same with the male models” can be quite problematic, especially following Jean Kilbourne’s video clip which explicitly addresses the reality that men and women do not inhabit a world with the same limitations on and exploitations of their bodies. To imply that the experiences of women and men in the media are “the same” overlooks and minimizes the systematic and systemic sexism girls and women suffer within as a result of the media and society at large. 97. Imani: [Motions toward Aisha with her left hand] Yeah, Aisha. 98. Aisha: I had this, umm, [indistinguishable] for this girl, and she [indistinguishable] And he said it was gonna take a long time for him to, umm, give us back our [indistinguishable] 99. Imani: Mmm hmm 100. And we stayed there while he made some changes, like my original hair color was grey and he made it like all, all black 101. Imani: [Nodding] Mmm hmm 102. Aisha: And the girl, she had a tattoo. He had to make her scar tattoo go away. And she had like stretch marks and stuff, so he made all her stretch marks go away. 103. Imani: [Nodding and overlapping] All that, mmm hmm 104. Aisha: [Overlapping] He had changed our eyes a different color, like, it was amazing 105. Imani: [Overlapping] Mmm hmm, how they can alter it, it’s true 106. Aisha: [Overlapping] He did so much stuff. It, it looked like us, but it didn’t look like us 204 107. Imani: Right, right 108. Aisha: And it was kinda scary cuz I’m like, “Anybody can do this!” 109. Imani: Yes 110. Aisha: To one of my pictures on “Facebook” 111. Imani: [Nodding her head big] Mmm hmm, mmm hmm. [Student laughter] 112. Imani: It’s true! It’s very true 113. Aisha: [Overlapping] Anything [Student laughter continues] 114. Imani: It’s very true 115. Alice: [aside] Casually mentioning her involvement in selling tickets for the event at the beginning of the class session opens the door to draw connections to the Killing Us Softly 3 video that could have added to and enhanced this discussion of images of women in the media and in society more broadly. Especially because the black women in the classroom were quite engaged in the discussion of images of women in the media, and the brevity of the inclusion of images of women of color raised in the “Killing Us Softly 3” video, a discussion of Ebony Magazine’s Fashion Fair could have brought more depth and connection between gender, race, and other social issues in the media. 116. Mary: [aside] I’m impressed that the instructor incorporated the video “Killing Us Softly 3” as a way to bring contemporary issues of gender bias and sexism that the students could relate to and understand into the curriculum. It is unfortunate that some of the comments and discussion led to the conclusion that men experience “the same” kinds of pressure and constraints. There was also a missed opportunity for the instructor to discuss the power 205 dynamics of systematic oppression in response to the (predominantly male) students’ comments about girls and women contributing to the images and discourses of sexism. 117. Judith: [aside] In this scene we again see the conflation of issues of sex, gender and sexuality. These concepts are without a doubt mutually constitutive and yet there are important distinctions that can be drawn to explicate and highlight relations of power. I would have loved to see a more in depth exploration of the ways media images are both gendered and sexualized, as well as the counter-images and experiences. The “Killing Us Softly 3” video certainly raises some important points about discourses of gender within society and the performance of gender, both real and perceived based on cosmetic and/or technological alterations. Scene 3: Killing Us Softly 3 – Reflections The instructor’s use of the, “Killing Us Softly 3” video, the content therein, and the discussion that follows enables us to again delve into an analysis of what is taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course from multiple perspectives. The students definitely appeared to be quite interested and engaged in the viewing of this video, as well as the discussion that followed. This can be analyzed and interpreted to reinforce each of the three theoretical perspectives – liberal feminist, womanist and postmodern feminist. Let’s look more closely at each perspective to examine what Alice, Mary and Judith have brought to our attention. The womanist perspective, shared by Alice, brings us back to the relationships and lived experiences at the intersection of race, gender and multiple identity characteristics. In particular, Alice remembers the instructor’s comment about selling tickets to the Ebony Fashion Fair and expresses how that could have been tied into the discussion of images of women, 206 specifically black women, in the media. The film “Killing Us Softly 3” discusses briefly the extreme objectification of women of color in the media. Women of color are often portrayed as “not fully human” and even depicted as animals. Alice points to Imani’s casual inclusion of her selling tickets to the Ebony Fashion Fair as another opportunity to have added depth and breadth to the discussion of gender by tying in race, social class and other identity characteristics, especially as related to her own experiences with the Fashion Fair. From the liberal feminist perspective, Mary views this scene as underscoring the pervasiveness of sexism. The engagement of the students in watching, and not wanting to stop, the video points to the ways that they can understand and resonate with the realities of sexism expounded upon in the clip. In the discussion the follows the video, Mary warns against comments by the instructor and students that minimize the impacts of sexism by equating the pressures on men to conform to images of masculinity to the ways the media and other social institutions condone the hyper-focus on the female body. Even within the video, Jean Kilbourne demonstrates jokingly what it would be like if men were critiqued in “the same ways” as women. According to Mary, and the liberal feminist perspective, it just doesn’t happen. Men do not live under the same scrutiny as women (both external and internal). Further, the discussion of girls and women contributing the perpetuation of sexism, even to the point of provoking violence, continues to be a major issue of concern for liberal feminists like Mary. Excusing the injustice and bias because it has infected both men and women alike does not serve anyone, especially women and girls. Mary also points out that Timothy’s comment that “it’s just the way things are right now,” especially coming from a male student shows us the dangers of allowing the status quo to pervade which only serves to maintain sexist attitudes and behaviors individually and systematically. 207 And, Judith, who interrogates these class sessions with a postmodern feminist lens, questions the nuances within discourses of gender, sex, and sexuality, seeking to generate complexity, expose counter-narratives, and draw our attention to instances of contextualized and historicized gendered performances. In this scene, Judith points to a missed opportunity within the video and the discussion that followed to follow up on the previous content and discussions and continue to delineate between the concepts of gender, sex, and sexuality. Again, we see the conflation of the three that serves to maintain confusion and the mutual constitution of discourses around gender, sex and sexuality that obscure the complexities of the performance of these identities and positionalities. In particular, Peter’s comment about Cosmopolitan magazine exemplifies the conflation of gender and sexuality as the topic of “10 best ways to have an orgasm” relates more to the issue of sexuality than gender. His comment also served in this scene to silence discourses that interrogated the harmful depictions of women in the media by implicating women subscribe to magazines like Cosmopolitan as perpetuating sexism. Were you able to tease out some of these issues along the way? Were there others that stood out to you that Alice, Mary and Judith did not pick up on? My hope is that it is becoming clearer and clearer to you now how much complexity and richness there is within education around the concepts of gender. Even within the short amount of time that we have spent observing and analyzing this one multicultural teacher education course, there have been an abundance of interactions, patterns and discussion points that have emerged as talking points from one or more of the three theoretical perspectives. The lived experiences, discourses and interpersonal dynamics of the individuals in this particular classroom bring to life the theories of Womanism, Liberal Feminism and Postmodern Feminism in ways that we can consider the implications within and beyond this classroom. These scenes also evoke questions and curiosities 208 about what occurs in all types of classrooms, locations, and interactions within education and society more broadly. Let’s get back to the classroom to see how the instructor continues this section of the course on the topic of gender. Scene 4: Assigned Readings – Guiding Questions In the next scene, the instructor brings the students back to a discussion of the assigned readings as related to the videos they viewed and the activities they participated over the past day and a half of class together. In doing so, we begin to take an important look over the two days of instruction to observe and reflect on what has been covered and how, as well as opportunities for further exploration of issues relevant to gender and education. In this scene the students are seen making connections across the content area and drawing on applications to their own lives and their roles as future K-12 teachers. And, with the help of Mary, Alice and Judith, these women support us in digging deeper into the issues that are being raised as we continue to hear their commentaries on what is being taught about gender and education in this multicultural teacher education course from liberal feminist, womanist, and postmodern feminist perspectives. Womanism (Alice) 1. How do gender and race factor into the interactions between the instructor and her students? Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 1. What do you make of the side comments and/or jokes made by some of the men across these two class periods? Liberal Feminism (Mary) 1. In what ways do the students talk about issues of sexism related to their own lives? 209 2. Why do you think the instructor seemed surprised about the story the student shared about her experience at her service-learning placement? Two additional questions that I would like to offer for you to ponder generally for this scene are: 1. What issues related to gender and education do you think are typically included within multicultural education? 2. What do you think are the relevant issues related to gender and education that teacher education students should be reading about? Scene 4: Assigned Readings – Script [Seated at the table in the front and center of the room, Imani transitions from the previous class discussion to the next part of the day’s agenda] 2. Imani: So, how, what kinds of connections can you make to what you read for Tuesday around the, umm, gender bias in schools, the Sadker and Sadker piece, umm, even the Lorber, the “‘Night to His Day’: The Social Construction of Gender.” Are there any connections that you would make between what you’ve seen today with “Tough guise”, “Killing Us Softly,” and then what you read in Tuesday’s readings? [Period of silence. Students are getting out their notebooks and articles] 3. Researcher: [aside] Awkward silence… Is this a result of the students not having read, or not remembering what they read? Like I said at the beginning of the first class period, some students shared with each other prior to Imani’s arrival that they hadn’t read because they were working on the paper due that day. And, even if they did read, they may have forgotten what they read between then and now given they were expecting to move on to 210 the topic of Sexual Orientation today. Are there other reasons for this uncharacteristic silence??? 4. Imani: [aside] I have found that my students generally don’t have a lot to say analytically about gender. I think it’s because they haven’t really thought a lot about it. As a result, I have to do a lot more probing to get them to discuss the readings. 5. Imani: Any points that people wanna highlight? And particularly around sexism, right, I mean I think, u-, uh, definitely in “Killing us Softly,” an undercurrent for her is the notion of sexism [Period of silence] 6. Imani: And who’s constructing these images of women? 7. Rasheena: The dominant culture 8. Imani: Well the dominant culture, but also, I would argue, men. It’s like the perfect woman 9. Marcus: In our eyes [Rhonda raises her hand, lowers it a bit and then raises it again as Imani speaks] 10. Imani: for, it’s the perfect image for man. So, umm, that in itself is systemic, I mean that’s, that’s sexism in itself; the fact that men are creating that image of what all of us women should look like, ok? [Rhonda hand is still raised, Summer and Jane raise their hands] Yeah, Summer. [Chelsea gets up and walks across the room and out the door] 11. Summer: I think also, as somebody said, like we do it to ourselves as well because like the, like looking back old time movies, like I remember they’d always want to look their best for their, you know, husbands, 12. Imani: [Overlapping] Mmm hmm, mmm hmm 211 13. Summer: [Overlapping] or boyfriends or whatever, so like take a girl who’s gonna go out on a Friday night in sweatpants 14. Imani: Mmm hmm, mmm hmm 15. Summer: So, like, like, yeah I do think a lot of it is about males, but I think women should, you know, realize that we do do it to ourselves [trailing off, indistinguishable] [Marcus raises his hand] 16. Imani: [Overlapping] Mmm hmm, mmm hmm, yup, yup, good point. Yeah, Marcus [Rasheena raises her hand just before the instructor calls on Marcus] 17. Marcus: I think the thing to understand is that, you know, this didn’t just happen, like, in the last couple decades, 18. Imani: Right 19. Marcus: This is, like, historical, like in the Middle Ages or whatever 20. Imani: Yes 21. Marcus: like, people wore corsets 22. Imani: [Nodding and overlapping] Mmm hmm, mmm hmm 23. Marcus: [Overlapping] and passed out cuz they can’t breathe cuz they’re trying to make their self 24. Imani: [Overlapping] Make their waist look thinner, that’s right. This is not just new age, yeah, this is way back, in fact, many women died early lives because those corsets were so tight they were damaging the ribcage, the diaphram, and they just died at earlier ages from doin’ that, o-, s-, over time like that trying to look thin. [Jane and Monica raise their hands] Uh, yes, Jane. [Motions toward Jane with her left hand as she calls on her] 212 25. Jane: I think that one reason why, like, we try to look our best all the time is because everyone expects you to, like, even if you know people are airbrushed on there, you’re like, “Whatever, everyone is supposed to look like that anyway,” so you kinda have to like, you want, you want attention. You don’t want people to be like, “Oh, she’s just over there” [Laura and Bethany raise their hands] 26. Imani: Mmm hmm 27. Jane: You want people to like notice you and stuff 28. Imani: Mmm hmm 29. Jane: So you always try to live up to the stereo-, like, you always try to live up to that expectation, even if they’re unattainable 30. Imani: Mmm hmm, and notice what she said about that period of adolescence, around 11, 12, 13, where this really becomes important for girls, that image, how you look, that’s those middle school years [Aisha raises her hand. Laura and Bethany lower their hands, but not all the way] 31. Nikki: Mmm hmm [Aisha lowers her hand] 32. Imani: And how being so focused on that can impact your academic achievement 33. Nikki: Mmm hmm 34. Imani: Cuz you’re so focused on other, on something else that then we see a shift, perhaps in girls academics, umm, because the focus is not there, it’s on body image. Bethany and then we’ll move on [Motions toward Bethany with her right hand] 35. Bethany: I was just thinking more about what Cheryl said about the Halloween costume thing 213 36. Imani: [Overlapping] Mmm hmm 37. Bethany: [Overlapping] That, like, society has, like, made it that if you’re like a girl our age, you are supposed dress in like a sexier way for Halloween 38. Imani: Mmm hmm, mmm hmm 39. Bethany: And if you don’t then there’s, then you’re abnormal 40. Imani: Mmm hmm 41. Bethany: Like, it’s become like a social norm that, like, you’re expected to dress like that, even if you don’t want to, to fit in, that’s how you’re supposed to dress [Nikki raises her hand] 42. Imani: Mmm hmm, mmm hmm, yeah it’s very interesting. I saw some Halloween Facebook pictures of some [urban education program]ers in the cohort above you, and I was like, “Uhhuh!” [laughing with dropped jaw] [Student laughter] 43. Imani: That is not what we wore for Halloween [Continued student laughter] 44. Imani: You know, like the maid costume with the skirt. I was like 45. Timothy: I want to be a maid for Halloween [Peter laughs loudly, other students laugh too. Chelsea reenters the classroom and walks back to her seat] 46. Imani: It was the girls. It was the girls. Uh, I was like, “Y’all look like some call girls.” And that is not what Halloween, the costumes are supposed to be like [Lots of comments, student talking over each other, distinguishable comments include “I mean that’s the costumes that they got for us” and “They make them for us” by women] 214 47. Imani: [Overlapping] They looked like call girls [Continued student laughter and side conversations] 48. Imani: [Overlapping] I was [indistinguishable] It was horrible 49. Timothy: I wanna be a sexy Harry Potter [Peter laughs loudly] 50. Imani: [Motioning toward Timothy with her right hand] Shhhh. What? Go ahead 51. Monica: Um, no, it’s just like I don’t know if you’ve seen that movie, “Mean Girls”? [Student laughter and side conversations continue] 52. Monica: How everybody was surprised when they made that other girl…[trailing off, indistinguishable] 53. Imani: [Overlapping] That’s right. Mmm hmm, mmm hmm, that’s right, that’s right 54. Mary: [aside] It is clear that these women can relate to and speak about their own experiences related to sexism as it plays out in today’s society and impacts their lives in negative ways. Summer shares with us about the expectations that are put on women to look good for their husbands and boyfriends, and how girls and women then hold themselves to these standards of beauty as well. Jane offers her view that the reason girls and women expect themselves to always look good is, “because everyone expects you to.” This is further evidence of the pervasiveness of sexism such that women are compelled to contribute to maintaining the system against themselves. Throughout this discussion, we hear first hand the challenges that these students face as women, even with finding Halloween costumes that do not objectify them. Strikingly, Bethany states, “if you’re like a girl our age, you are supposed dress in like a sexier way for Halloween.” And, she goes on to say, “it’s become like a social norm that, like, you’re expected to dress like that, even if 215 you don’t want to, to fit in, that’s how you’re supposed to dress.” Powerful statements made by a college-aged woman about the impacts of gender bias, gender discrimination, and the constraints of a male-dominated and sexist society. 55. Judith: [aside] In this section of the class period we also have yet another instance where male students are acting in ways that are disruptive, particularly with the use of humor, something that has been present in different ways throughout the two class periods. For Timothy to make comments about wearing a maid costume and being a “sexy Harry Potter” could be seen as dismissing or at minimum distracting from the seriousness of the topic as it is being raised and discussed by the women in the class, including the instructor. Is this yet another attempt to challenge the power relations within the classroom related to status (teacher/student), gender, race, and other characteristics and positionalities? 56. Alice: [aside] I agree. Looking at the conversation at the intersection of race and gender, at minimum, can allow us to see that the instructor is obviously not amused by Timothy’s joking comments and the ways that they detract from this discussion. The instructor uses her authority as the teacher to quiet him down with a hand gesture and “Shhh.” However, the implications of a white male student joking around about issues that are being raised in a serious manner by his African American female instructor can be far reaching, from oblivious inappropriateness to overtly undermining the instructor’s personal and professional authority. [Continued student side conversations] 57. Imani: [Picks up a piece of paper with her left hand as she begins to speak, looks at it and then puts it back down] So there are a couple of things from the Judith Lorber article that I wanna make sure you just kinda get out of it, and th-, one is the notion of, she talks about 216 gender roles change, and we did talk about this on Tuesday, that although there are some normative behaviors for gender roles, they do change over time, and I think these videos depict that. [Laura gets up from her seat and exits the room at the right] 58. Imani: Today we’ve talked about how women have become more violent through media depictions; it’s not just men. Umm, Tuesday we talked about the stay at home dads, right, that’s a, a s-, shift in gender roles. In a lot of families today when we see Mothers as the breadwinners, umm, that is a s-, a shift. So gender roles do change, right? Umm, they change with time, they change with place, with culture, right? These various things but that still the kinda normative patterns remain, and if you fall outside of that, you’re seen as abnormal. People may not call you abnormal, but they might call you things like butch, or sissy, or fag, or dyke, or whatever, because you don’t fit the role, you don’t fit the norm, ok? Or gothic, or weird, or devil worshiper, uh, because you are not performing the identity according to the norm. So I want you all to be thinking about that, particularly as future teachers and the various kinds of students you’ll have who perform their gender identity in all kinds of ways. [Rachel and Rasheena raise their hands] 59. Rasheena: Mmm hmm 60. Imani: And, it is not your job to make assumptions about their intellect, 61. Rasheena: Mmm hmm 62. Imani: right, about intellect based on identity performance, ok? 63. Judith: [aside] Precisely! The way Imani wraps up this section by addressing the roles these teacher candidates will have as future teachers and for them to reflect upon the “the various 217 kinds of students you’ll have who perform their gender identity in all kinds of ways” is a fantastic application of the postmodern feminist theoretical perspective. For these teacher candidates to walk away with a better understanding that how one performs gender is not foundational to any particular ways of being, especially intellectual and/or academic, is a great way to try on a postmodern way of thinking. 64. Alice: [aside] I would love to have heard more about these students’ experiences in relation to race and social class. This would have been a good opportunity for the instructor to elicit and/or share stories about how these concepts of gender are interrelated with other social issues such as social class and race. Gender, although a distinctly important aspect of identity, cannot be removed from other identity characteristics. The ways in which we all experience our lives and the world are at the crossroads of our multiple identities and positionalities. 65. Imani: Rachel and then we’ll move on [flips a piece of paper over and then back again and then clips several pieces of paper together with a paper clip] 66. Rachel: I was at my service learning yesterday, and I’m with the second graders. 67. Imani: Mmm hmm 68. Researcher: [aside] A major component of TE 201 is a service-learning project that students participate throughout the semester. The college students are paired with K-12 students within the Lansing area to tutor them individually for 2 hours a week. The servicelearning component of the course was designed for students to see and experience the concepts of the course as they play out with individual students and within they schools they attend. 218 69. Rachel: And like, I’m in the after school program and we [indistinguishable] for their “Power Hour.” The, umm, they were doing interviews 70. Imani: [Gets up and begins to write on the white board on the right side of the projection screen] Mmm hmm 71. Rachel: We asked them questions and they asked us some questions. So we asked them, like, what do they wanna be when they’re, when they get older, and the little boy said, “I want to be a police officer because they have dogs.” And the little girl said, “I want to be a mother.” And we’s like, “Oh, ok, well, umm, do you wanna have another job also?” She’s like, “No, my boyfriend gonna have a job.” [Student and instructor laughter] 72. Imani: [Pauses her writing on the board and turns around] In second grade? [Lots of student comments and side conversations] 73. Rachel: I promise you 74. Imani: Oh my goodness [Continued student comments and side conversations] 75. Mary: [aside] After all of the content covered thus far, why does the instructor seemed surprised by this? This anecdote shared by Rachel from her service-learning tutoring is a perfect example of how the issues of gender bias, gender discrimination, gender inequality and sexism pervade our society and our schools. Even in second grade, this girl sees the opportunities and possibilities for her life limited to the realm of motherhood. This is not to diminish that role, however, for a child that is around 7 years old to have already seemingly made up her mind that she will be a mother and be financially dependent on her boyfriend speaks volumes about the gender discourses she has been exposed to. 219 [Laura returns to her seat. Nikki and Cheryl raise their hands. Imani continues to write on the white board and then stops to speak] 76. Imani: Well, and you never know where that might come from, right? Maybe that’s the model in her 77. Rhonda: [Overlapping] Yeah 78. Imani: home environment, or she’s seen that model on T.V., or somewhere else in her family, so you just never know where children get their, umm, their models from, so it’s very interesting. Let me get this question out here that I do want you to journal about. [Turns toward the white board and points at what she’s written as she says it] It’s good that Rachel kinda segued into service learning. I want you to write about, “In what ways do you see gender being performed [Side conversations as Imani continues to write on the white board. Students prepare to and begin writing down the journal prompt. After finishing the writing and speaking of the prompt, she turns and walks back to the center of the front of the room, turns back around to put the marker back, and then walks over toward the computer podium as she continues to speak] 79. Imani: At your service site?” And that could be amongst kids, and with teachers, right? How do you see gender being performed? I want you to write about that in your journal, ok? The next time you go to that site, uh, focus or pay attention to that. Next week we’re gonna, uh, start talking about these interviews that you have to do with the administrators, yeah… [trailing off, indistinguishable] [Student side conversations continue] 220 80. Imani: But, copy that down and make sure you journal about that the next time you go. Alright, let’s try to transition now into today’s readings before we watch this video… [Lights fade as the instructor transitions to next course topic, Sexual Orientation] Scene 4: Assigned Readings – Reflections That concludes the final part of this second partial class session focused on the topic of gender. Within this scene we see the wrap-up of the topic and the beginning of the transition to the next course topic sexual orientation. Within this scene we were able to see the ways in which the three theoretical perspectives were applied as the two class sessions focused on the topic of gender came to a close. Specific issues raised here include the application of the content within the readings in addition to the activities and discussions over the two class periods to students’ own lives, as well as one student’s story about how concepts of gender played out at her servicelearning site. Mary takes particular interest in the ways the students are readily able to apply the content covered to their own lives and highlight the ways sexism operates in their experiences. Once the conversation got going, they easily filled the discussion time with stories of the negative impacts of gender bias and discrimination from women feeling like they have to look a certain way to the objectifying Halloween costumes for women. As the scene ends with Rachel’s story from working with 2nd graders at a local elementary school, Mary points out the clear and pervasive discourses of gender inequality and sexism that played out as the girl Rachel was tutoring talked about her boyfriend having a job while she fill her role as a mother. Alice picks up on the continued inappropriate comments made by Timothy that disrupt the class to the point of Imani intervening. Her interpretation of this continued disrespect and possible defiance within the classroom speaks to the racial and gendered dynamics at play 221 between this white male student and the instructor, and African American woman. From his comments earlier in the day about her daughter to this, it is clear that he is demonstrating a pattern of inappropriate behavior, whether he is aware of it or not. At this, Imani changes from joking to far from amused motioning for him to be quiet and telling him to “shhhh!” Beyond this particular instance, Alice again expresses her perspective that examining the intersections of race, gender, social class and additional identity characteristics more overtly could have enhanced and enriched the activities and discussions of these class sessions. Judith also picks up on and comments on the comments and behaviors of Timothy. Adding to her commentaries overall about joking and laughter being used as a tool to obtain or deploy power, Judith questions Timothy’s motives in distracting from and possibly minimizing the discussion the women were highly engaged in related to the sexualized images women feel expected to perform around Halloween. She even goes so far as to interrogate the ways his actions could be a more direct challenge to the authority of the instructor as she was leading the parts of the discussion where he chose to make his disruptive comments. Lastly, as Imani wraps up the class session, she urges the teacher candidates to consider their roles as future teachers and the responsibilities they have to all students to their students regardless of the “normality” of their gender performances. Wow! That was a whirlwind! So much to explore in so little time… So, now we’re left to reflect upon what was taught about gender during the course of these two days. And, what implications does this have on the teaching of this course, multicultural teacher education, gender and education more broadly? I’ll start by asking a question that is typical to one I would ask my own students after viewing a video or reading an article. “What stood out to you?” We’ll hear next from Alice, Judith and Mary as they reflect upon their observations of these two days 222 sitting in and commenting on this section of TE 201. However, I encourage you to take a moment before going on to pause and reflect on how YOU would answer the research question, “What was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course?” In the scene that follows, we hear Mary, Alice and Judith’s takes on “what was taught.” Let’s join them now. Scene 5: Debrief – Guiding Questions This scene gives us an opportunity to hear Alice, Mary and Judith talk with each other about the class sessions focused on the topic of gender that we just experienced together. Outside of the context of the classroom, the three women take the time to share with each other some of their reflections and the important points that stood out to them over the two days from their theoretical viewpoints (Womanism, Liberal Feminism and Postmodern Feminism respectively). As you will see, the women have much to say, sometimes about the same topics, sometimes about different topics, and sometimes highlighting different aspects of the same events. I can’t wait! As you see the three theorists converse, keep in mind the following questions: 1. What do you see as the main points raised and highlighted by each of the three women (Mary, Alice and Judith)? 2. Which of these three women do you most relate with and why? 3. Which of these three perspectives (Liberal Feminist, Womanist or Postmodern Feminist) do you feel is most valuable for these teacher education students? Scene 5: Debrief – Script [Mary, Alice, and Judith are seated at a small round table in the center of a local, independent coffee house on the outskirts of a college town.] 223 1. Mary: [cheerfully] I’m so glad all of us could be here today for this. I’m very excited to get started. 2. Alice: [down to earth] It certainly will be interesting to have this discussion, given our varied experiences and perspectives. 3. Judith: [inquisitive] Indeed. 4. Mary: So shall we get started? 5. Alice: Well, it seems to me to make the most sense to begin by talking about the class composition, looking at who is in the class, and how that frames the discussions and interactions. 6. Mary: Works for me. 7. Mary: [aside] It is odd, to me that we would start the discussion here although class composition is surely important to consider, it is necessary and important to look at the interplay between individuals and systems of oppression, and in this case specifically sexism. This is even how the instructor laid the groundwork for these class sessions by assigning Sadker and Sadker’s piece entitled, “Gender Bias: From colonial America to today’s classrooms” (Sadker and Sadker, 2001). This chapter is from the 4th edition of Banks and Banks’ (2001) “Multicultural Education.” As indicated in the chapter’s introduction, the writing focuses on understanding gender bias, educational opportunity, and gender-equitable classrooms. The chapter talks across these topics as well as the implications and consequences for men, women, boys and girls. Even the title of this section of the course is “Gender, Power, and Privilege.” 8. Judith: Context surely will be important to discuss. Although, I wouldn’t say that it is foundational, but more so bringing to light the situatedness of the interactions. 224 9. Mary: Ok, so there are two class periods that we’re talking about 10/14 and 10/16. 10. Alice: Right. 11. Judith: Yes, these are the days where gender is the topic of the class sessions. 12. Mary: It’s important to note that one woman was absent on the first day and two of the women in the class were absent on the second day. 13. Alice: Yes, one black woman was absent on 10/14 and the same black woman and the only Latina woman in the class were absent on 10/16. 14. Mary: Oh, really, I hadn’t noticed that it was two women of color, interesting. 15. Judith: Yes, it will be important to consider all the aspects of identity construction and performance. Who’s present and who is not. Also, looking at who is actively engaged in the class activities and discussion will provide an additional layer of complexity to consider regarding who is present or absent (physically or verbally). 16. Alice: Yes. 17. Mary: Ok, so that means there were 24 students present on the 16th, 5 men and 19 women, and 25 students on the 14th, 20 women and 5 men. 18. Judith: Now when you say these figures, are you certain about how the students identify their gender? How are you coming to these figures? 19. Mary: Well, you are right. I am not sure how the students would identify. I do know that according to the demographic data collected by the instructor that there were 21 females and 5 males in the course. 20. Judith: It is common for the concepts of sex and gender to be conflated in gender and education discourse, and even more broadly in U.S. society. Gender identity (whether someone identifies as a woman, a man, or any other transgender identity) can only be self- 225 identified by individuals themselves. At best, we can only make perceptual determinations based on cultural context as to what gender identity these students are portraying based on physical and aesthetic characteristics. 21. Judith: [aside] The instructor spent a significant amount of time talking about the difference between sex and gender. She asked students what the difference was and helped clarify for them that sex is more biological and that gender is socially constructed. She emphasized the ways that people of all sexes perform a variety of gender identities, and that masculinity and femininity are socially constructed ways of being that males, females, and intersex people perform. She spoke quite a bit about how society forces people to choose and that teachers can interact with students in ways that don’t constrain students to particular gender identities. The instructor wrapped up this section by posing some questions related to applying this to schools, urging the students to consider how they will not constrain students into boxes and how they will be more accepting of students’ different gender identities. This was definitely one of the key moments across the two class periods where the postmodern feminist perspective was most visible. This contributes to crafting the storyline of the complexity of teaching gendered performances. 22. Mary: Yes, however, regardless of how the students identify, there are particular consequences for females and women in society regardless of presentation. 23. Judith: There are also societal consequences, which can be quite severe, for individuals who transcend the traditional sex and gender categories. In this college environment at this point in time there are less rigid boundaries for these students to adhere to traditional sex and gender performances, however, there are still consequences based on how far or how frequent the transgressions are. Comments made by multiple students related to their 226 experiences growing up referenced this concept of being reprimanded or corrected by adults for exhibiting certain gender non-conforming behaviors or characteristics. 24. Alice: While these discussions are no doubt important, I cannot overlook the invisibility of race in these types of discussions of gender. And, unfortunately, often when gender is the content focus, other aspects of identity are not included concurrently. This was evident even within the two class sessions, in spite of the large number of people of color in the course and the fact that the instructor was an African American woman. 25. Alice: [aside] More often than not, the intersections of gender, race and other identity characteristics remains a underlying theme instead of one that is explicitly highlighted throughout these days focused on gender. The instructor encourages the students to look at their own lives and lived experiences as material to integrate and reflect upon to understand the course content, however, they are not asked specifically to interrogate the intersections of their identities as racialized and gendered. During the 10/16 class period, the instructor chose to show approximately the first 12 minutes of the “Killing Us Softly 3” video. Within the video there is a short section (about 40 seconds) where Jean Kilborne talks about images of women of color in the media as well as the parallels between sexism, homophobia and racism. Kilborne discusses how women's bodies are turned into objects/things and that this contributes to a cultural climate where women are seen as things. She further describes how this is often the first step in justifying violence against people based on the identity characteristics of sex, sexual orientation and race. As a function of sexism, homophobia, and racism, people are seen as less than human and therefore, says Kilborne, this makes violence against members of these groups inevitable. 227 Kilborne goes on to describe that the ways in which women are dehumanized and therefore targets of violence as a result, at least in part, of the images of women in the media impact women of color in particular ways. She notes that women of color are frequently portrayed as animals and/or featured in animal prints, sending a strong message that these women are not fully human. Besides this short discussion, there are only two images woman of color displayed throughout the remainder of the 12-minute clip. So, even though there is a brief discussion of the impact of the media related to women of color, the video itself reinforced the normality of white women being central in the discussion of images of women in the media. Showing this video, and the subsequent discussion, allows for the women in the class to speak from their personal experiences about the impact of images of women in the media. In particular, the women of color in the room could have had a platform for discussing the specific ways that women of color are represented in the media and the impact of that on their lives. Unfortunately, the discussion that followed the video didn’t unfold in that way. And, although there a couple of comments made about the video and images of women in the media and in society generally, there was no particular relationship drawn to the intersection of racial identity included or raised by either the students or the instructor. 26. Alice: On that note, let’s get back to looking at the demographics of this particular classroom. Addition to the information already shared, we also know from the demographic data that there were 14 African Americans, 11 Whites/Caucasians, and one Hispanic person in the class. 228 27. Judith: A fascinating composition of students, particularly for this course, as far as I understand. 28. Alice: Yes, the Urban Cohort of students is quite different in racial makeup than typical sections of TE 201. 29. Mary: To my knowledge, typically there are fewer than 5 students of color within a course of approximately 25 students. With regard to gender composition, however, this course appears to reflect a more typical TE 201 classroom with less than a quarter of the student population being men. 30. Alice: Alright, so given that makeup, we can then look at the location of students. 31. Judith: This is particularly salient given that the students in this class have chosen their own seats. 32. Alice: Yes. Did you notice the centering of black women, literally, in the classroom? Especially on the first day that gender was the topic of discussion, nearly all of the black women were seated in proximity to each other as well as closely surrounding the instructor. This, to me, speaks to the profound impact of instructor identity and classmate solidarity. 33. Mary: And did you notice that all of the men are sitting along the perimeter of the classroom on that day as well? What do you make of that? I wondered about the implications of this. Could they be monitoring the class, holding down the corners? It doesn’t appear that they are marginalized because of their locations… 34. Judith: It is important, however to look at specific instances of interaction and relationships where gender is salient. Location alone is certainly noteworthy, however, contextual specificity can call to question dynamics of power and gender as well. How does where the students are sitting enable or disable them from interacting with each other and/or the 229 instructor? What classroom relationships are fostered as a result? How does the content, gender, come into play, specifically, perhaps during the time students are asked to pair up and share with each other their responses to the free writing questions? 35. Alice: Yes, definitely. And the multiple identity positions that the individuals within the interactions hold is another relevant factor to explore. 36. Mary: OK. Are there specific examples that you would point us to? 37. Judith: Certainly, there are several instances that can be interrogated to bring to light the ways that gender is situated. Within the classroom discussion, the instructor raised the concept of people “doing” or “performing” gender. Throughout the class sessions, the instructor referred to and talked about the notion of performing gender, doing gender, and everyday experiences of doing and performing gender. She stated that, “we all perform it.” The students seemed to resonate with this interpretation. There were several comments made by students, particularly in sharing their responses to the free writing prompts where they shared experiences of transgressing gender norms and the traditional binary system of gender and the consequences that they incurred. These stories ranged from being told not to do something seemingly small like a student being told not to sit with her legs open, to another student feeling like she wasn’t “girly enough,” to another student and his friends being told by his father to stop giggling “like girls.” 38. Judith: [aside] These instances demonstrate ways that students transcend and even challenge the binary system of gender in their own lives. It was quite clear that many students had stories and situations where they learned how to, and how not to, perform their gender identities “correctly.” It is also notable that these comments where students talked about “crossing over” or acting like the “opposite” gender often produced a lot of laughter 230 in the class. I wonder why this was? Laughter is sometimes a response when someone is confronted with something that is uncomfortable. Is it possible that this was the case for these students’ reactions? 39. Alice: Additionally, you could see the relationships built between the students and the instructor in the classroom. The ways, in particular during “off-task” time, that students were very comfortable talking with each other and the instructor, and vice versa, about their lives, experiences and identities. This is often where the intersections of multiple identity characteristics were most evident. For example, following the free writing activity students were directed to share in pairs their responses. Because of where the students were seated, almost all of the black women (nearly 80%) were paired together for this activity, and each of the men (black or white) were paired with white women, leaving only two pairs of students and the one group of three (created by the instructor) out of the twelve pairs/groups mixed with black and white women. 40. Alice: [aside] Most striking is the overall message sent by the location of the students in relation to the instructor. On the two class periods in question, the seating pattern varies slightly. In the first class period, I found the location of the students in relation to the teacher in the classroom to suggest strongly that black women were at the center of the classroom, literally. Six of the ten black women occupied the two center tables closest to the instructor. And, the remaining four black women sat nearby behind them. For the second class period, it would seem that this pattern is not as strong. However, where there were usually two tables on each side of the center of the horseshoe pattern, this particular day there was only one table on each side, thus displacing students who may have sat here. A predominant number of the black women still sat in the seats closer to the instructor on 231 either side of the horseshoe (see diagrams prior to the beginning of each Act). To me, through a womanist lens, this speaks to the centering of black women in this classroom. As a result, these women are drawn to the center of the classroom, perhaps because the instructor is a black woman, perhaps because the content is particularly relevant to these students lives, but definitely speaking to a connection and relationship between each other and the instructor. 41. Alice: It is interesting, however, to note that the instructor does not share personal stories of her experiences during the more structured parts of the classes. 42. Mary: It seems like these examples add complexity and depth to the numbers and locations. However, it is still important to note the general trends in addition to these more close analyses. The systems of male privilege and patriarchy are still strong and pervasive within society. In particular, there is paramount research on the disproportionate ways that girls and boys are called on in U.S. classrooms. Boys are known to take up more space both within and outside of the classroom, and this classroom is no exception. Proportionally, boys are called on more frequently and the instructor spent more time responding to them. 43. Mary: [aside] In keeping track of and counting who was called on during the class periods where gender was the topic of discussion, I discovered that proportionally men were called on more than women. There were 48 instances of students being called on, 36 women and 12 men. Given that there were 25 students present on the first day (20 women and 5 men) and 24 present on the second (5 men and 19 women), men were then called on 1/4 of the times students were called on. This is proportionally higher than their presence in the class (approximately 1/5 of the students). And, this does not even take into consideration the number of times that boys spoke without being called on far more than girls, the volume of 232 their contributions, and the gendered patterns of communication that dismissed or challenged their classmates and even the instructor. 44. Alice: I agree that the discourses of racism, classism, sexism and other systems of privilege/disadvantage, no doubt, impact schools and society. It is important, however, to make sure that we are grounding our understandings of these concepts in the experiences of individuals, particularly the experiences of historically marginalized individuals. 45. Judith: Systems of power and privilege are created and maintained by individuals and interactions, most definitely. It is crucial, though, to identify the mechanisms through which people resist and recreate experiences moment by moment. It is through the project of deconstruction and interrogation that new possibilities emerge. [Lights fade to black as Judith is finishing her comment to indicate that the conversation continues.] Scene 5: Debrief – Reflections As you can see, there is much that these three women have to discuss about the class sessions they observed. And, from what you’ve heard and seen of them, it is clear that their theoretical perspectives impact what they see as valuable and important aspects of the course as they saw it unfold. This is not unlike you and I. I have done my best throughout these scenes to provide an opportunity to add my own commentaries along the way so that I could be transparent in the inclusion of my own subjectivities, as well as to highlight the similarities and differences among and between the commentaries of Mary, Judith and Alice. I have attempted to demonstrate the value of including multiple stories about what was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course. Not simply to tell a bunch of 233 stories, but to illustrate that there is always in all ways a story to be told about gender. What varies is who has the story to tell, in what ways, and why. Mary’s perspective on the happenings of the class sessions of this course filtered through her liberal feminist theoretical lens. What she looked for and what she saw most prominently were the instances, interactions and content that told the story of gender bias and discrimination within our schools and our society at large. As evidenced in this final scene, Mary’s attention was drawn to when and where women and girls were at a disadvantage or facing bias, discrimination or inequality based on gender. Judith, interrogating the class sessions employing Postmodern Feminism, crafts a story of the complexities and contradictions of gender identities, positionalities and performances. She highlights opportunities and circumstances to transcend the binary system of gender and challenges us to see into specifically situated interactions and relations of power as we produce subjective discourses of gender and education. You see in this scene her questions about how the students identified and the possibilities and consequences of interacting with and subverting the norms of gender within and beyond these two class sessions of this course. Judith also notes the places where the instructor chose to include and discuss gender performance within these class periods. Alice, speaking from the womanist perspective, presents a more grounded analysis based on stories that voice the lived experiences of people as their narratives intersect with the issues of gender, race, social class, and many other personal and social identities. Alice points out where the people are in the classroom, how they relate to each other and the possible influences of their multiple identities on their experiences and interactions. You also see Alice spending 234 quite a bit of time and energy giving voice to what is missing from the class session as it relates to issues of race, social class and other identity markers. Overall, the three women support us in seeing distinct yet overlapping stories about what was taught about gender and education within this multicultural education course through the content, the teacher moves and the student moves over the two partial class sessions focused on the topic of gender. Their perspectives are all limited in what they can and do focus on and foreground in their stories. Together, however, we are able to see a more complex and enriched overarching set of complex and contradictory stories that challenge us to continue expanding the research and discourse on gender and education. In concluding the scene of this production, we hear the reflective remarks of the instructor, Dr. Imani Jones. I feel that it is appropriate to both begin and end this story with the voice of Imani as the instructor of the course. This is first and foremost a move that communicates my deep respect and appreciation for her openness and willingness for me to enter into her classroom to conduct my research. Privileging Imani’s voice within this work is also a move stemming from my feminist poststructural research methodologies. The stories that are told here about what is taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course are in many ways meaningless without involvement and dialogue with its instructor to both inform and reform teaching within and beyond her classrooms. 235 Epilogue Instructor Reflections Imani: [Standing alone on the stage] So, I’ve never had anyone do research in my classroom on my teaching before. It’s really been a cause for pausing and reflecting and I’ve appreciated that. It was fascinating to see the different perspectives on what happened and what events and interactions within the classroom were commented on. At first, honestly, I felt bad when I read them. I felt like, maybe I wasn’t doing enough and that it was a disservice to my students. After my initial conversations and involvement in the research project, I was certainly much more conscious of my lack of in-depth focus on gender. Being involved in this project has made me more conscious of my teaching of gender since that semester. I’ve made many changes in my approach to the topic of gender in my teaching of the course. For example, I am using more gender references in my organic examples. I also know that when the “gender day” comes, I have a much more nuanced set of activities in my toolkit. I’m now using the “Killing Us Softly 4” which is more up-to-date. I also use some Dove YouTube clips from their “Real Beauty” campaign that talk about girls’ body image and self esteem. So that body image piece has become more salient – looking at both girls and boys. For boys, we look at the use of steroids and the pressure on boys to be the strong, macho man. So, all-in-all, I’d like to think that I’m doing a little bit more and going a little bit deeper as a result of the researcher being in my class. And, I’ve really strived to connect the gender content of my courses since this research project to academic engagement. My discourse has become much more concentrated on the social construction piece and how boys and girls are “othered” and less about the privilege and 236 oppression piece. They can read things about gender and inequalities in the classroom, but I’m having them look more at social constructions and how that impacts academic engagement and as a result academic achievement. We explore how attempts to subscribe to or resist the normative gender scripts impact students’ academic engagement and thus academic achievement. I encourage my students to foster counter-scripts for kids – scripts that counter the ones that they’re so bombarded with that shape their social identities. Overall, I feel that it’s been a good thing for me to do to be a part of this project. New interpretations and perspectives on teaching about gender have been brought to my attention, and it’s been really fun and interesting to explore my teaching practice in this unique way. Researcher Interrogations and Extensions As this project began to cohere it became clear that there was a tension in the format that I chose to present the data and analysis. In choosing to include the transcript in the form of a piece of performance art certain structures emerged that both provided opportunities as well as restrictions on what I could and could not voice and highlight. In particular, some of the choices that I made as the “playwright” of this work became invisible because the nature of the “researcher” character that I created represented the researcher in the “real-time” unfolding of events within the classroom and therefore was not in a position to provide a meta-analysis of what she observed. In response to this circumstance, I have included the following interrogations and extensions. First, presented in the format of an interview with the playwright, I will respond to questions about the structure and decision making that went into the creation of the play and its implications. The questions were generated by the members of my dissertation committee and allow me the space and opportunity to reflect on this project more broadly than the structure of 237 the previous sections of this work provide. As you read the interview below, you will see questions posed by the members of my committee under one umbrella title of “Interviewer” and responses by me with the title “Playwright.” Following the Interview with the Playwright, I have included “Take Two” on one of the scenes from the play. I have chosen to re-present the analysis on this scene as a way to extend what was possible to present within the format of the original play. I have included the guiding questions, script, and reflections on the scene, as well as a closing meta-analysis section to add to the analysis that can be provided through the perspectives of Mary, Alice and Judith. It is through the re-presentation of this scene that I hope to demonstrate a deeper level of transparency as the researcher/playwright, as well as to continue to open the door for extensions beyond what I have written here. Interview with the Playwright. Methodological and Theoretical Moves. Interviewer: Why did you select the days on which gender is formally taught? How did these days differ (or not) from the other days since gender as performance is part of the classroom everyday? When gender became the formal topic, how did gender as the informal topic in the classroom shift? Playwright: I was interested in examining what was taught about gender and education within this context, and so I decided to focus my inquiry on the days where gender was the topic of activities and discussion. This choice allowed me to not only look at what was included within the explicit curriculum related to gender and education, but also to interrogate what was included in the hidden, implicit or embodied curriculum. Obviously these types of curriculum cannot be so clearly distinguished from each other. There were many times besides these two days where 238 gender was included in the content of activities and discussion. And, in terms of how gender was incorporated in implied or performed ways, that is continual, regardless of the content within any given class session. However, choosing these days (or the one day originally carved out of the curriculum for the topic of gender that extended into the next day) provided me with what I felt was the opportunity to see “the most” about what was taught about gender and education in a concentrated fashion. Let me expand on what I mean by being able to see “the most” in these two class sessions. As stated earlier, I examined the content, the teacher moves and the student moves within these class periods in order to answer the overarching research question about what was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course. These class periods also allowed me the “best” view of content, student moves and teacher moves related to responding to the questions and organizing idea I employed to operationalize the research question specific to the three theoretical lenses, 1) How is gender bias taught? 2) How are the concepts of race, class and gender taught through the use of narratives? and, 3) I want to craft a story of the complexity of the teaching of gendered performances. Although these questions could be attended to in multiple ways in a variety of contexts, the class sessions that centered on gender brought issues of gender and education into the forefront of the explicit curriculum in addition to being able to examine the implicit and hidden curricular aspects of these days. Now, as you notice in my explanation thus far I have put “the most” and “best” in quotation marks. This is to emphasize and problematize these statements. Because gender was the specified content on the days that I chose to focus my study, I do believe that I was able to see much more about gender, especially in the location of content or explicit curriculum. Although gender as a topic was incorporated throughout the course the days outside of the two 239 days I highlighted in my project, the content on gender was often sparse and limited to inclusion alongside multiple categories of identity and positionality such as race, class, language, and ability. This is not uncommon within Multicultural Education discourse and research (Nieto, 2004; Gollnick & Chinn, 2002; Sleeter & Grant, 2003; Banks & Banks, 2005). Research and writing about/within Teacher Education has shown the lack of curricular inclusion of gender (Zittleman & Sadker, 2002; 2003; Mader & King, 1995). My research adds to and extends this research, as well as research that incorporates issues of gender beyond the explicit curriculum (Jones, 1989; Poole & Isaacs, 1993; Asher, 2007; Knight, 2002; Ellis, 1993; Hollingsworth, 1995; Baker & Richardson, 2005). My study aims to examine the explicit curriculum of the course as well as the situational and interpersonal dynamics within the classroom, the implicit and/or hidden curriculum, simultaneously from a variety of theoretical (Womanism, Postmodern Feminism, and Liberal Feminism) and personal (the instructor’s and my own) perspectives. I did not set out to examine specifically the difference between how gender and education was taught within these two particular days as compared to the other days of the course, and so I can only speak to the second part of this question in more anecdotal and informal ways. Although I had videotaped nearly every class session of the course for the entire semester, I chose not to review the class sessions outside of the two days when the focus of the content was gender. In order to provide context for the course, as well as to inform my formal and informal interviews with the instructor, I did review my field notes from the entire semester many times. However, it was not my intention in doing so to conduct a comparative analysis as such. It is important here to emphasize that it is not, and has never been, my intention to describe and analyze what happened in this course or in these class sessions to prove any “truths” about 240 gender, gender identity, gender performance, and the like. My overarching intention with this project is to open conversations and discussions to points of view and theoretical perspectives that infrequently enter into discourses about gender and education (within and beyond teacher education). What I can say with confidence is that some of my ideas about what was being taught about gender were certainly being formulated throughout the course of the entire semester as I sat in on the class periods and took my field notes. As I observed the class periods, I took note of where the students typically sat, how they interacted with the instructor and each other formally and informally, small group dynamics, and the many aspects of the instructor’s pedagogy. Many of these dynamics were highlighted within the scenes of the play as they arose during the two class periods where gender was the specified topic. Along these lines, the performances of gender did not strike me as significantly different on the days where gender was the formal topic. However, I present this tentatively with the knowledge that it was initially my impression that the instructor called on her students equally (from the Liberal Feminist analysis examining gender equality), both in general and across the two class periods focused on gender. After careful analysis of who was called on it became clear that there was, in fact, an inequality. As described by Mary in the final scene, men were then called on 1/4 of the times students were called on, which is proportionally higher than their presence in the class of approximately 1/5 of the students. Now let me return specifically to the question, “Why did you select the days on which gender is formally taught?” I will answer it along the lines of how this particular curricular context provided me with opportunities to answer my overarching research question, “What was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course?” As I 241 examined what was taught through the three theoretical lenses of Postmodern Feminism, Womanism and Liberal Feminism, and the corresponding organizing idea and questions that I employed to operationalize the research question specific to the three theoretical lenses, 1) I want to craft a story of the complexity of the teaching of gendered performances, 2) How are the concepts of race, class and gender taught through the use of narratives? and, 3) How is gender bias taught? After the analysis and writing of the data collected during the days focused on the topic of gender, including the creation and writing of the play, the assertions that I am making through this dissertation are that, 1) Gender is performed within specific contexts, relationships and power relations, 2) Gender can only be understood through narratives and in relationship with race and other aspects of identity, and, 3) Gender bias still exists. Through these scenes we can see that gender is performed within specific contexts, relationships and power relations. Crafted in the language and interactions of the instructor and the students of this course within these two class sessions, these performances were both evident and interrogated in ways that are unmistakable and ultimately greatly impactful on the future discourses of gender in multicultural teacher education and all its related fields. Within this multicultural teacher education course, gender can only be understood through narratives and in relationship with race and other aspects of identity. We saw this within the sharing of personal experiences both by the instructor and her students, within the videos shown during these class periods, as well as in the casual interactions between Imani and students. Lastly, these scenes demonstrate that gender bias still exists. The ways that gender bias and discrimination were talked about and played out within these pages is quite evident within patterns of communication and interaction, within the course content, in the stories shared by the students, and much more. 242 Throughout the play the three assertions are also made evident through the inclusion of guiding questions that have been presented in alignment with each of the three theoretical perspectives. As I began to develop the play as the primary method of writing and presenting my data and analysis, I continually challenged myself to create ways for those who would interact with my dissertation project to engage with the research question and it’s three offshoots personally. And, especially in seeing this project as a teaching tool for educators, future educators, teacher educators and others, as I have seen with teaching videos (Tough Guise, The Color of Fear, etc.) I sought to create a tool for those facilitating discussions to assist in getting conversations started. That is when I came up with the idea of creating discussion questions to go along with each scene of the play. In developing these questions, I focused on what questions would encourage viewers and readers of the play to look for and analyze themselves responses to my research question, “What was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course?” and to do so by trying on the three theoretical perspectives of Womanism, Postmodern Feminism, and Liberal Feminism. As I state earlier, when I began this project I crafted more specific ways to focus in on what was taught through the three theoretical lenses I employed to analyze my data in order to operationalize my research question, “What was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course?” For Liberal Feminism, I utilized the question, “How is gender bias taught?” To highlight the Womanist lens, I looked at “How are the concepts of race, class and gender taught through the use of narratives?” And, to evoke the Postmodern Feminist perspective, I employed, “I want to craft a story of the complexity of the teaching of gendered performances.” The guiding questions for each scene of the play attempt to support viewers and facilitators with points to elaborate on and interact with that respond to these two questions and 243 guiding idea. In short, the guiding questions at the beginning of each scene encourage a more nuanced analysis of the overarching research question specific to the theoretical framework I chose for the analysis of this research. In answering the specific guiding questions appearing before each scene, the three theoretical lenses (Womanism, Postmodern Feminism, and Liberal Feminism) are engaged through particular instances, interactions and activities throughout the two class periods focused on the topic of gender. Focusing on the days when gender was the focus of the curriculum also brought to light possibilities and opportunities related to the incorporation and integration of the topic of gender both within and beyond these days from the perspective of the instructor. This can be specifically seen through the Imani’s reflection following the final scene of the play. She communicates there that, Being involved in this project has made me more conscious of my teaching of gender since that semester. I’ve made many changes in my approach to the topic of gender in my teaching of the course. For example, I am using more gender references in my organic examples. I also know that when the “gender day” comes, I have a much more nuanced set of activities in my toolkit. Although it was not the overarching intention of this project to directly influence Imani’s teaching of gender within TE 201, it is clear that her involvement in this research project has had an impact on her thinking and teaching about gender in multicultural teacher education. I believe that focusing my study on the days where gender was the specific content provided a platform for Imani to interrogate and adapt her approach to and integration of teaching about gender and education, both explicitly and implicitly, within and outside of the days focused on gender. 244 Interviewer: There are many kinds of feminisms (e.g., cultural; separatist; materialist; lipstick). Even SparkNotes lists 20 different kinds of feminisms. How and why did you arrive at your three categories (liberal; womanist; postmodern)? Playwright: One of my overarching goals in this study is to broaden, widen, and deepen discourses of gender and education within the field of Multicultural Teacher Education, as well as overlapping fields such as Multicultural Education, Teacher Education, and Urban Education. This goal aligns with poststructural feminist methodologies, as well as my own philosophies, ideologies, epistemologies and pedagogies. As a result, I knew that I wanted to include at least 3 theoretical perspectives that consider gender as a primary element. Two seemed too few to illustrate the multiplicity of perspectives and voices. And, as I considered incorporating more than three, it seemed to be more was needed. My point was not to include all, or even most, feminisms or theoretical perspectives that consider gender. Beside the reality that this would be impossible as conceptions of feminism are ever changing, growing, and constituted within their own matrix of discourses and contextual factors, it was not my goal to even attempt to present an exhaustive or entire picture of what could be seen as taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course. That being said, decisions did need to be made about which perspective to include in this project. Because I have concluded, based on my understanding and perspective on the ways that gender is typically included within Teacher Education, and education more broadly, that gender is more often than not incorporated through the perspective of gender equality, gender bias and discrimination, it made good sense to me to include the Liberal Feminist perspective. I see many parallels between the discourses within Liberal Feminism and the ways in which gender issues 245 have been approached and discussed within Teacher Education, Multicultural Education, and related fields. Gender issues are discussed within Multicultural Education using theoretical frameworks maintaining a clear focus on educational inequality (Banks & Banks, 2004; Banks & Banks, 2005; Boyle-Baise, 1999; Gollnick & Chinn, 2002; Nieto, 2004; Sleeter & Grant, 2003). At the forefront of the issues presented are gender discrimination (both within and beyond educational institutions), equal educational opportunities for students regardless of gender, and issues of inclusion and exclusion related to gender and education. Teacher education programs that have been committed to teaching for social justice include gender, as well as many other social issues, along the same framework as the field of Multicultural Education (Sanders, 1997; Mader & King, 1995; Hollingsworth, 1995). Approaching issues of gender identity and difference from the perspective of inequality has positively impacted Multicultural Education, and the scholarship on education more broadly. Addressing sexism, gender bias, gender discrimination, sexual harassment, and other important topics related to gender and education has altered classrooms and schools for the better (Sadker, Sadker & Klein, 1991). Although there is still more work to be done in this regard, it is clear that teachers and administrators have become more aware of how gender bias impacts the schooling of their students, and programs have been implemented to counter these impacts (Zittleman & Sadker, 2003). It is, however, only one approach to looking at issues of gender in education. In the words of Cornell West, “Race Matters.” Through my studies of feminism and my experiences in activism related to gender it has become evident to me that all too often discussions of gender and feminism monolithically refer to white women, and middle class white women at that. As a result, I knew that it was important to me, and to my study, to include a 246 theoretical perspective that would examine the intersections and interconnection between gender, race, social class and other social and cultural categories of identity. I have always had a personal connection with Womanism ever since I read Alice Walker’s (1984) definition of Womanism as a college student studying Women’s Studies at the University of New Hampshire. “Womanist is to feminist as purple is to lavender” (Walker, 1990). Womanism is a theoretical lens based on the lived experiences of African American women (Walker, 1990). It represents a critical response to mainstream feminism and women’s standpoints that present the interests and experiences largely of white women of the middle class. Womanism is related to, and yet distinct from, black feminist theory (Hill-Collins, 1990; hooks, 1989). Through these perspectives, issues of race, class, and gender are inextricably linked. The focus then becomes ending forms of oppression (racism, sexism and classism), as opposed to seeking gender, race, or class equality. I value the complexities and nuances of the womanist perspective as distinct from black feminism. Phillips (2006) describes five overarching characteristics of Womanism: (1) it is antioppressionist, (2) it is vernacular, (3) it is nonideological, (4) it is communitarian, and (5) it is spiritualized. Very little has been written specifically employing this theoretical lens within educational research. I chose to employ Womanism within this project because I felt that it offered a necessary and unique perspective on what was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course. Further, attempting to understand gender without explicitly exploring the connections to race and social class feels irresponsible to me given the evolution of feminisms and other social and cultural theoretical frameworks that urge us to examine the intersections of multiple identity categories (Tong, 1998; Nieto, 2004; 247 Gollnick & Chinn, 2002; Sleeter & Grant, 2003; Banks & Banks, 2005; Asher, 2007; Knight, 2002). Furthermore, my studies, experiences and observations of discussions and discourses of feminism and gender have also frequently referred monolithically to women and the experiences of being women. I chose to include Postmodern Feminism as a theoretical perspective in order to open my analysis to uncovering and discovering ideas and conceptions of what was taught about gender and education within this multicultural education course beyond the experience of being a gender (woman, man, transgender, or another static identity marker). To include Postmodern Feminism allowed me to incorporate interrogations and curiosities about how these students and this instructor both talked about the performance of gender, as well as how they themselves performed gender within particular instances, interactions, and relations of power. Gender can be seen as a verb instead of a noun – to ‘do gender’ as opposed to ‘being’ a gender (West and Zimmerman, 1987). I first read West and Zimmerman’s (1987) work as an undergraduate within a Sociology of Gender course I took at the University of New Hampshire. I had never thought about gender as something that is “done” instead of something that “is,” and the concept has resonated with me and fascinated me ever since. It is in this course that I also had the opportunity to read Barrie Thorne’s (1997) work Gender Play: Girls and Boys in School that examines students’ participation as social actors who create gender structures and meanings through their interactions within classrooms, on playgrounds, as well as in multiple other school spaces. When I began teaching the course on multicultural issues in education as a doctoral student, Barrie Thorne’s study was one of the first additions I made to the curriculum on gender issues within my section of the course. 248 I also had the great fortune of working with an advisor and faculty member at UNH who introduced me to postmodern feminist theoretical perspectives, and particularly the work of Judith Butler. Judith Butler is one of the most prominent feminist theorists to challenge the use of “women” or “woman” to connote a common or unified identity. Butler critiques theories and feminists who do not recognize that, “[r]ather than a stable signifier that commands the assent of those whom it purports to describe and represent, women . . . has become a troublesome term, a site of contest, a cause for anxiety” (Butler, 1999, p. 6). From a postmodern/poststructural framework, Butler challenges feminists to see gender as “performed” and “constructed” through multiple interactions as opposed to a label or category of people. She poses that, “[i]f there is something right in Beauvoir’s claim that one is not born, but rather becomes a woman, it follows that woman itself is a term in process, a becoming, a constructing that cannot rightfully be said to originate or to end” (p. 43). Ultimately, as a result of my own personal inclinations and performances of gender, as well as my studies within and beyond Women’s Studies and my involvement in activism related to gender, and other aspects of performed identities, I felt it was necessary and valuable to include the postmodern feminist perspective within this research project. Postmodern Feminism challenges the concept of gender altogether as performed within interactions and contexts of power relations that then produce, maintain and contradict discourses of gender within education and beyond. Within the context of this teacher education classroom, the postmodern feminist perspective opened up opportunities not only to explore the ways that the instructor and the students discussed gender beyond the traditional binary system across the two days focused on gender and education, but also to interrogate and examine the ways in which these students and the instructor were themselves engaged in performances of gender. The incorporation of this 249 perspective adds richness and depth to this dissertation because of the unique critical, and simultaneously deconstructive and generative qualities of Postmodern Feminism, as well as the scarcity of its inclusion within Teacher Education research. Analysis and Writing Moves. Interviewer: How does the format of a play shape your analysis? What’s more visible through this format and what’s less visible? When compared to a more traditional dissertation format, what’s lost or gained? Playwright: Presenting the data and analysis as a piece of performance art is the demonstration of feminist poststructural methodologies including the multiplicity of voices, subjectivity and participant involvement. Feminist poststructuralism, although there is debate about the existence of a center or focus for these theories and methodologies, interrogates power and knowledge, language and discourse, and subjectivities. To conduct feminist poststructural research is necessarily impossible. Because poststructuralism resists, challenges and complexifies categorization and essentialization, the ability to code data, to locate themes and to deduce within research becomes antithetical to its own aims. However, to employ feminist poststructuralism within research methodologies is to raise questions, to point at possibilities and opportunities, and to challenge oneself and interrogate ones own subjectivities along the way. Choosing a play as the style of writing presentation for this dissertation highlights the possibilities and opportunities related to discourses of gender and education instead of making absolute claims or positing truths stemming from this data collection and analysis. This could be seen as a loss or limitation without specific and straightforward monolithic assertions or conclusions. In turn, however, there is much to be gained through the play format as a piece of educational research that employs feminist poststructural methodologies. 250 By including the transcript of the class sessions as the framework for the play and constructing voices for the three theoretical perspectives – Womanism, Liberal Feminism, and Postmodern Feminism – through Alice, Mary and Judith, the theoretical framework that I employed comes to life. Through the voices of these three women this format depicts the ways these different lenses come into play at any given point across the class sessions. For example, at the beginning of Act 1, Scene 2, all three women comment on the instructor’s choice and construction of the free writing activity. However, the ways in which the three women describe and analyze the structure of the activity, the interactions and comments throughout the activity, and the possibilities to extend the activity are overlapping in some ways and distinct in others, as well as contradictory at times. Judith points out how the free writing activity was framed within the traditional binary system of gender. She also comments on stories that students told about their experiences growing up and not conforming to the norms of their expected gender roles emphasizing how children are taught how to perform their genders, as well as the consequences of not properly doing so. Alice comments on the relationships that are established related to race and gender identities through the locations of the students and the instructor in the classroom, the interactions between and among all of them, and the stories and histories that the instructor and the students share, or do not share, within the classroom. Alice also speaks to the possibilities available to the instructor to more explicitly include issues of multiple identity characteristics into activities that encourage students to reflect on and share their personal stories. Mary, on the other hand, focuses on the theme raised by female students in the class that they were unable to act in certain ways or participate in activities because they were girls. For Mary, this is further evidence of the disproportionate impact on girls and women of gender roles and the burden of 251 not living up to societal expectations. As you can see, there are commonalities in the reflections and perceptions of the three women, and at the same time each perspective brings forward a unique interpretation of the free writing activity. Another benefit of this dissertation writing style is that it enables others to extend and challenge my analysis and writing of the data as I have presented it. By presenting my data and analysis in the format of a piece of performance art, and adding characters that are both engaging with the content and happenings of the course as well as encouraging the viewers to do so, this dissertation becomes interactive instead of static. It is my intention and hope that this project will both add to and spur additional discussion and discourses on what is taught about gender and education within and beyond multicultural teacher education. In my writing I am transparent about the reality that my interpretations and analyses are necessarily written through my own unique perspectives of this course, this classroom, this instructor, my understanding of the theoretical lenses, and much more. As a result, and intentionally so, the play format allows for multiple interpretations and re-interpretations of what was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course, as well as the implications this research has on teacher education, multicultural education, and other related fields and discourses. One of the particular choices that I made to emphasize and illustrate this possibility was to limit the amount of stage direction specifically interpreting the non-verbal and tonal nuances of comments and interactions. For instance, when Terrance asks the question, “Can the dudes be, uh, mature?” during the activity about stereotypes during Act 1, Scene 3, there are a multitude of ways that this question could be asked including frustrated, sarcastic, pleading, and lighthearted to name a few. And, the response by the instructor to say “immature” and to add it to the list under the category “boy” could also be interpreted in multiple ways including, playful, 252 condescending, serious, and calm, among others. Therefore, the decision to minimize the stage direction opens the doors for readers, actors, and observers of this dissertation to interact with and understand the variety of interpretations that can be created, performed and viewed related to what is taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course within and beyond the two class periods at the center of this study. Within this format, I was also able to incorporate the voice of the instructor in ways that brought to the foreground her perspective and reflections. Instead of only including my own commentaries about and analysis of the instructor along the way through a more traditional dissertation, I was able to co-construct space for the instructor to share her perspective in her words on what was happening in the course and some of the reasoning behind her pedagogical and personal choices as the instructor. Throughout the play there are lines highlighted in yellow where the instructor provides commentary on some of the choices that she made as the instructor of this course both generally and specific to the topic of gender both during the days where gender was the specified content and throughout the course. This choice as a part of the format of the play allows the instructor to speak for herself in reference to the content and pedagogy of the course. And so, in places like at the beginning of Act 2, Scene 3, Imani is able to share that she is showing the “Killing Us Softly 3” video to her class for the first time, which provides readers and observers with additional context in viewing and interpreting the content and interactions that follow. This move on my part also aligns well with feminist poststructural research methodologies that I employed within this project by making the involvement of the instructor a critically valuable component of the writing and analysis of this project. 253 Through the play layout, it is easy to see how the theoretical perspectives (Womanism, Postmodern Feminism, and Liberal Feminism) interact with the content and dynamics within the classroom experiences. The format of the play allows readers and viewers to see and experience the interconnections and contradictions between the three perspectives. I went to great lengths to embody the three theoretical perspectives as I viewed the data and wrote the transcript and the analysis, specifically in the form of the commentaries within the transcript. As a result, these characters can come to life within the scenes as they share their viewpoints about what goes on within the classroom. This format and structure of the project and the writing allows the interactivity of knowledge, power, and discourse of feminist poststructural methodologies to be enacted with and for the readers and observers of my research. Interviewer: Describe your subjective stance and how that shapes what you were able to see (or possibly not see) in the data. How does your subjective stance shape what the three characters say or are able to say? As part of this, describe how your former role as an instructor of this course shaped what you “saw” (and didn’t see) in your analysis? Playwright: My role as a former instructor of many sections of this course over many years, in my opinion, is one of the largest impacts on the data collection, analysis, writing and presentation of this dissertation. Throughout the construction of this project, the collection of the data, the analysis, writing, and ongoing interviews/conversations with the instructor, I was always inevitably thinking about and looking at the course from the unique perspective of having taught (in fact simultaneously teaching) sections of the same course, though not with an urban education focus. I taught this course every semester of my doctoral studies except one. Some semesters, I was the instructor for more than one section, and I taught one summer section one 254 year as well. By the end of my tenure teaching the course, I had taught the course more than anyone else teaching the class during the regular school year, including the course coordinator. I have often described teaching this course as the highlight of my experience as a doctoral candidate, and that it was the best and most challenging opportunity of my academic life. One of the most interesting things for me in teaching this course was to adapt my experiences teaching and learning about social issues to prospective teachers. I had a vast amount of experience as an activist and advocate for marginalized populations beyond the arena of teacher education, and so was able to both expand my own knowledge by including specific concepts from within K-12 education, as well as broaden the standard curriculum to include aspects of teaching and learning about social issues I had previously encountered and taught from within and outside of the university classroom. I had noticed right away that there were certain issues and approaches to teaching the course that were privileged over others. When I was oriented to teaching the course, there was a primary focus on teaching issues of race and social class and theories of social and cultural capital. Issues of gender in education were addressed only peripherally and often at the end of the course. Sample syllabi shared with me allocated one day to address gender, which highlighted issues of gender bias and discrimination. As a result, the first summer I spent constructing my syllabus to teach the course, I took on the challenge of expanding and deepening the instruction on issues of gender, as well as a host of other issues and theories I felt needed to be addresses more directly and thoroughly in the course. In particular, I sought to incorporate readings and activities that would engage students in understanding and questioning the gender binary as well as traditional gender roles, and examining the intersections of social issues and identities. Because of my interest and passion for broadening the discourse about gender to include perspectives and approaches 255 beyond the traditional liberal feminist perspective, I had made it my mission in the teaching of this course to create space for the inclusion of multiple perspectives. At first, I focused primarily on how I would teach the course differently and the impact that I could have on my own students in teaching issues of gender. As the years went by and course coordinators changed, I became more confident in my attempts to change the structure of the course. I was eager to offer my insights to other instructors in addition to assisting in adapting the course framework to include issues related to gender and gender identities in new and different ways. I was not alone in this. There were other instructors who were making changes in their own individual teaching strategies and who acted as resources for new and veteran instructors on gender issues and who were also advocating for alterations to the course as a whole. I share all of this to shed light on the dedication and duration of time I spent both studying and incorporating issues of gender and education into the course, as well as teaching and designing the course on the whole in ways that best served the future teachers that would take the course and the students they would inevitably impact along their teaching careers. This is one aspect of my own subjectivity as a teacher, researcher, scholar, and activist. Sitting in on and conducting research within the classroom of the faculty coordinator of the course enabled me to see first hand the fruits of my labor over the years in working within and on its content and pedagogy. I know that without a doubt this subjective stance within and about the course, and its instructor who I hold in high esteem and with much respect and admiration, is the perspective through which I collected, analyzed, and wrote about what I “saw” across the class sessions of this multicultural teacher education course. 256 Specifically, because of my participation in the teaching and coordination of the course, I was definitely looking for ways to talk and teach about gender beyond the typical lens of gender bias and discrimination, what I call liberal feminist within my study. I had put much time and effort into incorporating perspectives of multiple identities as well as the performative nature of gender within my own teaching and in my interactions with other instructors teaching the course in the hopes that I would impact the course content specific to gender. And, although I had spent considerable energy examining the ways that gender had been taught within the sections of the course that I had instructed, I didn’t really know to what extent other instructors, and specifically the course coordinator had. In my study, I definitely expected that there would be a lot going on within the course where I collected my data and that this would lead to a complex and exciting examination of what is taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course. And, as a result, I am sure that this allowed me to be more alert to and tuned into instances, interactions and course content related to the teaching of gender. I would say that overall my belief that gender is both infused within and pervades interactions, experiences, and realities urged me to look anywhere and everywhere for possible stories teaching about gender within the formal curriculum and in every other facet of this multicultural teacher education course. As I stated earlier in my discussion about the choice of the three theoretical perspectives – Womanism, Liberal Feminism and Postmodern Feminism – throughout my evolution as a woman, a feminist, an activist, a scholar, and an educator (among many more subjectivities) I have both promoted and critiqued various feminist theoretical discourses and practices. I have seen the value first hand of single-sex education for girls as a participant and staff member at a summer math program for girls. As a result, I find value in the contributions and perspective of 257 Liberal Feminism and was eager to see what stories might be told from these class sessions related to gender bias and discrimination, explicitly and implicitly. I have challenged myself and others to look beyond the single identity characteristic of gender (whether conflated or not with sex) to see the inevitable and inextricable links with other social and cultural characteristics by exploring my own multiple identities and the privileges, disadvantages and particular circumstances that I have encountered as a result of the many aspects of who I am. As a result, I feel that the contributions of Womanism must be advanced and was eager to see what stories might be told from these class sessions related to the inextricable links among and between students’ and teacher’s multiple identity characteristics and their lived experiences of them, within the curriculum and as observed in the interactions between the instructor and her students. Lastly, I have questioned gender (including my own gender) as static, unchangeable and ahistoric, viewing and playing with the innumerable ways that gender can be performed and the benefits, as well as consequences, of these performance choices on interactions, institutions and relationships. As a result, I feel that the possibilities and complexities of Postmodern Feminism bring forth invaluable perspectives and was eager to see what stories might be told from these class sessions related to gender performances and their relationship to the maintenance and/or challenging of the binary system of gender within and beyond the class sessions of this course. Each of these experiences and interrogations, as well as countless others, meant that I came into the classroom of TE 201 looking for certain things with a particular set of eyes and coming to conclusions that were all filtered through who I was, had been and would be. I was thrilled to examine the class sessions of this course through the lenses of Womanism, Liberal Feminism, and Postmodern Feminism. These theoretical perspectives have contributed to my understandings of gender and education, both my own and that of others. And, my 258 interpretations of what I observed are attributed to my own integration of these concepts, and, ultimately, who I am. This fact is inevitable, as we cannot detach ourselves from who we are, how we see, and how we think. For example, my assessment that the instructor had done “a good job overall” in her presentation of the content in the sex/gender lecture is filtered through my perspective and observations that most instructors of TE 201 did not cover this content at all. Another influence that I can cite related to how my subjectivities played into the data collection, analysis and writing of this project relates to my relationship with the instructor of the course. Because of the depth and nature of my relationship with the instructor, I must admit that I was not willing to be critical in of the instructor and her teaching choices, style and performance. Imani was my colleague, in fact my supervisor at the time, and has remained a dear friend of mine. I hold my relationship with her in high regard. In addition to this, I have personally evolved to hold a stance related to research within and beyond the field of education that looking at the possibilities, questions, and opportunities that arise from any circumstance far outweighs the benefits of criticizing. In light of this, I have set out to highlight what I observed within this multicultural teacher education course by crafting stories that demonstrate the complexity teaching about gender, gender and teacher education, and gender and education more broadly. Therefore, these stories are meant to broaden discussions, as well as teaching and research agendas, instead of making any particular assessment of the pedagogical choices of the instructor. Reflective Musings. Interviewer: Now that you have studied and analyzed the formal gender curriculum of one Teacher Education diversity course, what has been the biggest change in your thinking about 259 gender and/in teacher education? In what way(s) has this dissertation study been educational for your own thinking? Playwright: In the process of planning, participating within, analyzing and writing this dissertation, the one overarching message that I have received and generated along the way is that “It’s all in the nuances.” That’s my biggest takeaway from this project, and surprisingly what has been most educational for me. I say surprisingly because I would have thought that there would be little to nothing that would surprise me in completing this work. Not because I know everything there is to know, as that is hardly the case, but because my methodologies and epistemologies are so deeply connected to knowing that there is so much to know, and so much that we don’t know, and that what is known is only known in certain ways, by certain, people, in certain situations, certainly. And so, I expected to be uncovering and incorporating multiple perspectives, ideas, and even juxtaposing them with each other along the way. I didn’t expect to be surprised, because I expected any number of things could and would emerge from my data collection and analysis. All that being said, what surprised me, what stood out was the reality that no matter how many times I had watched a video, or listened to the audio, or reviewed my field notes, or read through the transcript, that there was always something more to point out and to analyze. In everything that I looked at, everything that I did, I found over and over again that it was “the nuances” that made all the difference. This made things VERY difficult for me, and at the same time very easy. It was difficult when to decide that I would stop going over the same material, but at the same time amazingly easy to do my work, which was to highlight the nuances, the complexity and the contradictions. 260 For example, as I stated earlier, in looking at the videotapes and deciphering what was, and in turn what was not, important to focus on I decided to include very little stage direction related to tone and other non-verbal interpretations. I chose not to write for instance that what someone said was delivered in a surprised tone of voice, or a that a student put their hand down in a frustrated way. I made this choice because I wanted to leave doors open for readers and actors engaging with the script to make their own meaning of what was happening and for that to be a part of the interactivity and generativity of the style of writing I chose. However, I realized that in making this choice that I was leaving out what could be seen as crucial information about the interactions and dynamics that I observed being played out within that classroom. Because I had spent the entire semester in the classroom, I had developed my own understanding of and rapport with the participants with and from which to read the interactions. However, I still knew that my interpretations were just that, interpretations. Then again, on the other hand, so was ALL of what I had chosen to transcribe! See what I mean?! It’s all in the nuances!! What to do? How to do it? Why? What are the implications? What are the benefits? What are the consequences? It’s all so fascinating! Interviewer: What do your findings suggest for what ought to be taught and how in a course like TE 250? Playwright: In line with the findings of this study, it is imperative to address issues of gender and education from multiple perspectives, presenting and discussing multiple voices, and engaging and evoking gender as constructed within a multiplicity of harmonizing and contradicting discourses and power relations. Understanding gender and education through Liberal Feminist lenses, which enlighten us to issues of gender inequality, gender bias and gender discrimination, 261 is the most prominent discourse within the fields of Multicultural Education and Teacher Education. And, this perspective has positively impacted fields of education and teacher education in many ways. However, there is much more to the story (stories) that we can benefit from researching, discussing and teaching about related to gender and education. Additional discourses, Womanism, Postmodern Feminism, and many, many more, must be included explicitly within research, teaching, and discourses of gender and education in order to broaden and deepen discussions, practices and policies of education. These “other” stories of what is being taught about gender and education within (and beyond) this multicultural teacher education course reveal that there is more than can be seen through one theoretical perspective alone. And, in examining what is taught through multiple lenses enables us to construct more nuanced and complex understandings of gender and education than are currently available. Within this project, the instructor of this course demonstrates courageously what it can look like to incorporate multiple theoretical perspectives about gender and education within her teaching of this multicultural teacher education course. By taking some risks and experimenting with different activities and approaches, this instructor has begun to model teaching about gender and education from and beyond the liberal feminist perspective. And in doing so, she opens the doors for her students to co-create their experiences of what is taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course as well. Through the content, the teacher moves, and the student moves of these class sessions, we can see the possibilities and opportunities to engage purposefully with issues of gender and education from multiple theoretical perspectives. 262 Interviewer: If you were to do another study about gender in a teacher education curriculum, what would you like to do differently (methodologically and/or conceptually)? What kind of study would help you take the next step in your thinking about gender in teacher education? Playwright: Wow, those are great questions! There’s so much that comes to mind, it’s hard to narrow it down. Two things stand out to me right away as possibilities for next steps: 1. To complete a study in another section of the same course with same instructor. 2. To conduct a study on the use of the play within this project as a teaching tool. To follow up on this study by continuing to work with the same instructor and the same course would provide continuity of relationship and increased ability to go deeper together as teachers and researchers. If the instructor would agree to it, I would also set up regular conversations with her to discuss her teaching of the course. As I conducted the research this past time, I did my best to maintain a bit of distance as the researcher and chose not to discuss with the instructor how things were going in the course or any of our reflections related to my research project until long after the course was over (in part because the instructor was on sabbatical and also because I took a break from my PhD studies at that time). In the analysis and writing of this project, I can see how increasing my contact and conversations with the instructor throughout the data collection process could have enhanced the construction of the analysis and writing of the project, especially the inner-monologues of the instructor. Thinking more generally about what I would do differently if I were to do another study about gender in a teacher education curriculum, logistically I would test all of the equipment multiple times, both the functioning of the equipment and the placement of it. Some of the video cameras that I used did not have good audio to them, which limited my ability to hear the dialogue at times. I did not anticipate equipment malfunctions. Also, the placement of the video 263 cameras, even with having seven of them positioned around the room, still felt limiting at times in terms of being able to see everyone well and to capture body language, facial expressions, and other non-verbal (as well as verbal) movements and postures. The second idea that comes to mind is to conduct a study on the use of the play I have written here as an educational tool within a teacher education setting. It has been my overriding goal to not only conduct educational research, but also to create new possibilities for research and teaching within and about gender and education, specifically within multicultural teacher education. Therefore, it would be fascinating to me to engage in a follow up research endeavor that would put this play as an educational tool into practice. Act 1, Scene 2: Free Writing [Take Two] – Guiding Questions. In the scene that follows, you will see an activity where the students are encouraged to both write about experiences, memories and messages related to gender and share their writing in pairs and then in the whole class setting. This activity gives us insight into how the instructor’s pedagogy as well as the value she places on her students’ voices and stories. This scene also engages viewers in an interrogation of the location of the people in the classroom, both the teacher and the students. Here we begin to question the interactions between the students and the instructor, as well as between the students as locations for learning more about gender and multicultural teacher education. Each of the theoretical commentaries, provided by Alice, Judith and Mary, assist us in seeing what is taught about gender within this classroom from each of their unique perspectives (Womanism, Postmodern Feminism and Liberal Feminism). They help us to see what is taught explicitly through content and direct instruction, as well as what is taught implicitly through language, interaction and the inclusion (or omission) of certain topics, questions, or discussion. 264 The guiding questions for this scene are included below. I have divided them up into three sets of questions because each set of questions primarily correlates with one of the theoretical perspectives. These questions also align with the overarching questions and guiding ideas for each of the three theoretical perspectives. You will see within the scene that the lines between the perspectives are often blurry, however, I offer these questions as a way to keep in mind each of the perspectives as you watch the next scene. It is also primarily these issues that the three women (Judith, Mary and Alice) will highlight and comment on as the scene unfolds. Liberal Feminism (highlighted by Mary) 1. In what ways do the students’ experiences growing up reflect gender bias and discrimination? 2. The instructor mentions that she tries to call on students equally by gender. How successful do you think she is with this? Womanism (highlighted by Alice) 1. How do the experiences shared here by the students differ based on race and gender? 2. What can we learn about gender and race based on the location of the students and instructor in the classroom? 3. Why do you think the instructor might not share her own personal experiences in this class session? 4. How does the instructor interact with her students in ways that demonstrates shared understanding and experiences? 5. In what ways could the instructor have incorporated multiple identity characteristics into the free writing exercise? Postmodern Feminism (highlighted by Judith) 265 1. In what ways do students share personal experiences that transcend the traditional boy/girl binary system of gender? 2. What does the instructor mean when she talks about “doing gender”? 3. What kinds of comments from which students elicit boisterous laughter from both students and the instructor? Act 1, Scene 2: Free Writing [Take Two] – Script. [Students are involved in side conversations with each other as the instructor moves from covering announcements and logistics about the course to the topic for the day. The instructor is standing in the front of the classroom swinging her arms to the side and then together in front of her and clapping her hands as they come together in front of her stomach.] 1. Imani: Ok, let’s get ready. Take out a piece of paper, we’re gonna do a little free writing around gender, so let’s set your mind in gender. [Students move around to get their paper ready to write on. Side conversation between Imani and Monica that is indistinguishable about the “Ain’t No Makin’ It” book, which Monica hands over to Imani] 2. Imani: [aside] I like having them reflect on childhood memories. I like the idea of having students start out reflecting, on any day, historically, on the recent past, or on their childhood past, writing or pairing and sharing at the beginning of the class before we go into a discussion that’s guided by specific questions. 3. Researcher: [aside] The pedagogical move by the instructor to start with her students reflecting, writing and sharing about their childhood experiences shows us the value she places on engaging the students’ on not only an academic level, but 266 also a personal level. This is just one of the many moves that the instructor makes regarding the content and structure of this class session focused on the topic of gender. These instructor choices will be one primary site of interrogation by Mary, Alice and Judith, the three theorists who are joining us today. Pay close attention to the overlapping and yet distinct ways that these three women will explore teacher moves like this one, as well as moves the students make and the content included on the topic of gender. These three locations (teacher moves, students moves, and course content) will all be sites of interrogation and understanding for the stories that emerge from this multicultural teacher education course as we examine what is taught about gender and education. 4. Imani: Shhhh, doesn’t take any chatting. We need to move quickly. I’m going to holler out some questions to you until I can get my power point ready. And I want you to, umm, write about these, ok? We’re focusing on the social construction of gender. Alright, the first one, what are your earliest memories of how you learned roles [emphasis on the word roles] for being a boy or girl. I’ll repeat it, what are your earliest memories of how you learned roles for being a boy or girl. Earliest memories. Write about that for me. What are your earliest memories of how you learned roles for being a boy or girl? [Quiet while students were writing. Imani works to get the technology set up] 5. Mary: [aside] Starting with early It is important to explore how and why memories of how the students Mary adds these comments. As a Liberal learned roles for being boys and Feminist, Mary is interested in, and girls is a fantastic way to uncover therefore keys in on, what occurs here 267 the ways gender bias and sexism exist and are instilled at early education and society more broadly, ages and maintained throughout through a framework of gender equality the lives of girls and boys as they and inequality. Mary sees the choice and grow into women and men. Boys construction of this activity on the part and girls are taught from birth of the instructor as one to bring forward about what it means to be a girl experiences that students have had in and grow into a woman and what forming their conceptions and realities it means to be a boy and grow of gender roles within a world imbued into a man. The roles, with sexist and discriminatory systems particularly for girls and women and practices. Mary is primarily become restrictions on what they concerned with the experiences and can and cannot do and be. What voices of the women in the may seem benign at first, playing classroombased on her belief that, with dolls and pretending to despite the restrictions or constrictions cook, leads girls into the placed on boys and men, girls and domesticated roles that become women are forced to live in a world that oppressive constraints to only be is plagued with male dominance and mothers and wives in their supremacy from the moment the words futures. 6. within this classroom, as well as in “It’s a girl” are uttered. Imani: What are your earliest memories of how you learned roles for being a boy or girl? 268 [Quiet while students were writing. Imani continues to set up the technology] 7. Alice: [aside] This activity also Alice’s comments here highlight her provides students an opportunity to interest and focus on the use of incorporate their experiences as narratives in order to dialogue and children from varied racial and educate about issues of gender, race, class backgrounds in addition as class and other social/identity exploring their memories of categories. It is through the examination learning roles for being boys and of lived experiences, according to girls are inseparable from these Womanists like Alice, and relationships other identity characteristics. I am that develop within and across eager to see the ways in which the communities that systems like racism, students share their stories and sexism and classism can be dismantled. look at the ways that they have learned and lived out their racial, gendered and social class identities. 8. Judith: [aside] I am curious, Judith points out here that it is the however, about how the framing of specific language the instructor used to gender within the binary system frame the activity that will evoke or (‘boy or girl’) directs students to construct certain responses from the remember only certain memories. I students. The pervasiveness of referring wonder what memories could be to gender as boy/girl, man/woman, 269 evoked by asking students about prevents us from knowing or hearing memories of learning about gender what could be shared if gender was without specifying the roles of boy referred to without this additional and girl? It is extremely important prompting. Judith’s comment here is to recognize the ways that also positioned to respond to Alice’s instructors can limit or expand a comment about students sharing. As a reflection activity such as this Womanist, Alice sees experience as through the language that is used to foundational. As a Postmodern Feminist, introduce and facilitate it. Judith interrogates anything posited as foundational as constructed and maintained through language, discourse and contextualized relations of power. 9. Imani: Ok, I’m gonna read out the second question. You still may be writing, and that’s ok. What messages did the people around you pass onto you about being a girl or boy? What messages did the people around you pass onto you about being a girl or boy? And those people could be parents, teachers, friends, just people around you. What kind of messages did they pass on about being a girl or boy? [Quiet while students were writing] 10. Imani: What kind of messages did you receive? [Quiet while students were writing. Imani looks in her bag/purse for something.] 11. Imani: And then the third question: How did these messages affect how you thought about yourself? [pause. Imani begins to walk around the classroom as she continues 270 to talk] So first I asked earliest memories, secondly what messages, and who was conveying messages, and then third, how did these messages affect how you thought about yourself? [Quiet while students were writing. Imani continues to set things up in the classroom] 12. Imani: Take about one more minute to write on all three. [Quiet while students were writing. Imani organizes extra handouts and then sits down] 13. Imani: Thirty more seconds. [Pause] 14. Imani: Alright, I want you to share for a few minutes with your, uh, the person next to you. Umm, Chelsea you share with Lily and Stacey [directed more quietly at Chelsea], and then everybody else has a partner. Share w- based on each question, 1, 2 and 3. Make sure each person has a chance to share. [Time spent in pairs sharing answers to questions – indistinguishable. Imani spends time looking through the “Ain’t No Makin’ It” book from Monica. Also during this time, Imani gets a technology aide (who appears to be a woman) to help her set up the PowerPoint display] 15. Alice: [aside] Notice the location Alice’s focus on where the students and of the students in the classroom. instructor are located in the classroom Can you see how the students are extends her focus and analysis on the situated related to race and gender? relational aspect of Womanism. By Most striking is that 8 of the 10 situating themselves in certain locations 271 black women are located ‘front and in relation to the instructor and each center’ by the instructor. And, as other, the students are creating a certain you can see, for this activity, that classroom experience for themselves. It means that working in pairs from is not uncommon for people to be seen where the students chose to sit clustered together in public spaces pairs up 8 black women with each where their location is a choice other. To me, this shows how (cafeterias, classrooms, etc.). Of course sitting near each other can provide it is notable and noticeable when these black women opportunities to groupings are of people with visibly share with each other in formal and distinguishable identity characteristics informal ways. And, sitting closer (race, ethnicity, language, etc.). to the instructor allows them to develop that relationship with their instructor as well. Fascinating! 16. Imani: Ok, take about two more minutes. [Time spent in pairs sharing answers to questions – indistinguishable. Imani and technology aide still working on setting up the PowerPoint display] 17. Imani: Alright, let’s wrap that up and let me take a few comments from the group, first looking at question one. So, umm, earliest memories, some folks tell me a little bit about earliest memories. [Hands raised: Terrance, Rhonda, Jane, Ashlee] 18. Imani: [aside] When calling on students, I try to think about who has spoken that week or that day. I try to think about cultural difference balance, race and gender 272 are the two that are most visible. I’m mostly thinking about who has talked and who has not. I don’t want any one voice to dominate in the class, or have students that can think they can skate without talking at all. So every once and a while I will call on someone whose hand is not raised 19. Mary: [aside] This is definitely an There exists a dearth of research about extremely important issue related who gets called on by teachers by to classroom dynamics and gender and the types and length of pedagogy. All too often, even well- responses given by teachers following meaning instructors call on boys student contributions. Studies have more frequently. The fact that shown that even well-intentioned female Imani tries to monitor who she instructors tend to call on boys more calls on is a great step toward a frequently and will often probe them for gender bias-free classroom. In extended periods of time following boys’ order to gauge the reliability of answers to questions. Therefore, it Imani’s self-monitoring, I am also makes good sense that Mary would not keeping track of who raises their only pick up on the statement made by hands and who is called on by the instructor that she attempts to call on gender so that we can see if she is students in ways that attend to balancing successful in her endeavor of cultural difference, but also that Mary achieving balanced participation in would be intent on checking for herself these class sessions. whether or not the instructor is actually able to do so. 273 20. Imani: Jane 21. Jane: Uh, mine was probably Barbies because you had Barbies you need to brush their hair, and you had princess Barbie, and like beach Barbie, and so you dress them in these cute outfits and then all the boys would have like G.I. Joe, like with the strong man who like went, like the soldier, and then Ken who’s strong and had his surf board. 22. Imani: [Still working on her laptop to set up the PowerPoint presentation] Umm hmm 23. Jane: So you just get to see the differences between them. The women are supposed to have pretty dresses 24. Imani: Umm hmm 25. Jane: and the guys are just supposed to be strong. 26. Imani: Umm hmm, Ok, Ok, good. [Hands raised: Terrance, Ashlee, Peter, Cheryl, Aisha] Ashlee [Imani walks away from the computer podium and then back to it while Ashlee speaks] 27. Ashlee: Umm, me and Timothy both put both put like the separate lines in like kindergarten and preschool. How there’s like a boys line and a girl line 28. Imani: Ah ha [big head nod and affirming smile] 29. Ashlee: Yeah, and then also I put like umm like when we went to like assemblies or church 30. Imani: Umm hmm 31. Ashlee: in my school we had to sit boy-girl-boy-girl to separate 32. Imani: Ah, yes 274 33. Ashlee: so the guys like wouldn’t goof around 34. Imani: Mmm hmm [Student laughter] 35. Imani: Ok, so those are some early memories. [Hands raised: Terrance & Peter (never lowered), Tonya, Cheryl] Peter [Imani goes back to focusing on her laptop for a bit and then crosses her arms and walks to the front and right of it closer to Peter] 36. Peter: Um, my, my earliest memory was, uh, I I lived with my grandmother for a couple years of my life, and umm every time my cousins came over I would, I would always hide because whenever they’d come over, umm, my uncle, who’s my mom’s twin, he would always kind of make these little comments, like, “Why aren’t you outside?” 37. Imani: Mmmm 38. Peter: “You’re never outside.” 39. Imani: Mmm hmm 40. Peter: Like, “What, what are you, what are you doing?” You know 41. Imani: Mmm hmm [fixes her hair] 42. Peter: Like, “Why do you just, why do you like, why do you like to watch T.V.?” 43. Imani: Mmm hmm [still fixing her hair] 44. Peter: “Why do you…” and it’s just like, Ok, I’m getting away from that! 45. Imani: Right [Student and instructor laughter] 46. Peter: So [laughter], I’d be in closets and… 275 47. Imani: Ok, Ok, [Hands raised: Terrance (never fully lowered), Tonya, Cheryl] Terrance 48. Terrance: I was about to say, yeah, when I was like you know I would say like yeah around kindergarten cuz, you know like dudes played with like G.I. Joes and like Hot Wheels and then you had girls that played with like little plastic kitchens, [Student laughter. Imani walks over closer to Terrance and then proceeds to turn the front lights off (which increases the view of the PowerPoint projection)] 49. Terrance: and then uh Easy-Bake Ovens and whatnot [Student laughter] 50. Terrance: So you know [Lots of student side conversations] 51. Imani: Shhh [Imani walks back to the front of the classroom and picks up the attendance sheet from in front of Monica on her way] 52. Terrance: Gender roles was already bein’ uh, you know, assigned or whatever through your toys. 53. Imani: Ok, alright, so again some more kindergarten… 54. Mary: [aside] Note that the first Mary is clearly well prepared to hear comments from students all these typical responses about the reflected the drastically different experiences and messages of the gender roles perpetuated by toys students in this class as young children. and other cultural and societal The discourse of blue and pink toys and institutions like schools and their impact and implications on the families. Both Jane and Terrance roles that children learn as they grow up 276 refer to the toys that girls and boys played with mentioning Barbie and gender. Because Liberal Feminist plastic kitchens for girls and G.I. theories are based on the notion that Joe and Hot Wheels for boys. there is a system of gender inequality set These toys encourage girls to play up within society, gender bias can be dress up and practice their roles as seen and experienced at all ages and in future mothers and wives. Boys all places. Seeing the distinctions in toys instead are encouraged to be strong that children are encouraged to play and drive fast cars. These roles with is one aspect of a larger system that consistently and pervasively sets up what can, and cannot, be enacted perpetuate gender inequality and or accomplished based on gender. sexism by teaching boys and girls Further, a power dynamic is set up at young ages who they can and between men and women that holds cannot be. 55. has crept into countless discussions of women at a disadvantage. Judith: [aside] Yes, however, you Judith’s comment here again highlights have to acknowledge that the her focus on language and discourse and question students were given to how the responses of the students are answer asked specifically about the situated within relations of power. roles they learned for being boys Because of the overwhelming adherence and girls. The framing of these to the binary system of gender within questions within the binary system this society, as shown in the framing of of gender perhaps encourages the free writing question, it has become 277 students to search for messages a part of our discourse to understand that highlighted the distinctions and speak about experiences and between the two traditional gender identities related to gender as culturally identities. Had the instructor asked distinct, and drastically so. It is not a question encouraging students to uncommon to hear about gender roles, reflect upon how they learned to gender differences, and distinctions perform their gender in different between toys and experiences growing contexts and within different up. These storylines have become known relationships, there would likely ways to think and talk about gender. The have been a more varied set of students’ responses must be interrogated stories offered in response to that with that contextual background. inquiry. 56. Imani: [Hands raised: Summer, Cheryl, Rhonda, Tonya] Yeah, Tonya [Imani stands beside computer podium facing Tonya with one hand leaning against the podium and the other hand on her hip] [Cheryl gets up to get attendance sheet and bring it back with her to her seat] 57. Tonya: Umm, me and Rasheena’s was like related, because I used to, umm, I noticed when I used to always be around like older males when I was being potty trained, and I used to always wanna stand up, and my mom would always be like girls sit down, boys stand up [Student and instructor laughter] 278 58. Imani: Ok, ok. [Hands raised: Rhonda (never fully lowered), Rasheena. Imani turns toward the center of the room still standing behind the computer podium area] So we have some very, Oh, Rhonda, go ahead 59. Rhonda: Umm, when I was younger, I was very bad at sitting. So, you know, like when I would wear a dress, my mom would always be like, “Close your legs, girls don’t sit with their legs open” 60. Imani: Mmm, hmm. [Rasheena raises her hand. Imani moves into summary statement, without calling on Rasheena, standing behind podium area talking with her hands] 61. Imani: So some messages seems like family members, school, right, church, uh, how we were patterned to sit or even line up, things of that nature, the toys we played with, the toys we saw, that influenced us, so tho th the early memories, ok, for learning these roles. 62. Judith: [aside] What is particularly What Judith points out here is a crucial interesting about these comments look at how the binary system of gender is the way that these students have is both constructed and maintained by learned about gender by being told teaching children (and by extension what was inappropriate or unusual adults) about not only how it is about their behavior. Both Tonya appropriate to behave according to and Rhonda shared experiences gender, but also, and perhaps more where they were taught about how importantly, how it is inappropriate to to be a girl by being told not to act act. Being disciplined to stay within the in a certain way. Tonya was told understood boundaries of a certain 279 by her mom not to stand up to pee and Rhonda was told by her mom including gender, is a powerful way to not to sit with her legs open. 63. normative performance of any label, maintain normative practices. Alice: [aside] Further, what is Alice’s perspective that focuses being taught and learned here is specifically on the intersections of not specific only to gender. Notice multiple identity characteristics enables that these African American girls her to see the unique ways that these were both reprimanded by their women of color are talking about their mothers about how to act. experiences learning about and living Situations like these can teach out their lives with respect to gender, children about social class, race, race and other social and cultural education, and many other identities. It is important for Alice to discourses. Through these two take into account the social and situations we can identify historical contexts in which gendered discourses of motherhood, of race, and racialized identities are enacted, as of gender, and perhaps even of well as the implications of social class social class. Mothers of African and status, and the connection to the American girls are often quite strict mothering of these African American with their daughters about how to girls. All of this shows us the complex act as a way to prepare them to be realities of the lived experiences of these African American women in a girls that point to larger social and sometimes harshly prejudicial cultural pressures that African American 280 society. girls face in this society both from outside of and from within their families, albeit an attempt to protect them. 64. Imani: Umm, let’s talk about the messages. What messages did the people around you pass on? And some of that’s connected in the examples you all were sharing. [Hands raised: Bethany, Cheryl, Rasheena] Rasheena 65. Rasheena: My granny, like, she used to just think girls were just supposed to be, you know, like like trophies, and they was just supposed to be pretty, you’re not supposed to cuss, you’re supposed to talk softly 66. Imani: Mmm, hmm. 67. Rasheena: you’re supposed to always have your n-, your nails done, your hair done 68. Imani: Mm hmm. 69. Rasheena: like, things like that, so I just really thought that was 70. Imani: the message 71. Rasheena: how girls were supposed to be. [Imani picks up her bag/purse from the floor and puts it on the chair next to her. Tonya gets up and gives attendance sheet to Nikki] 72. Imani: Mmm hmm, very neat, very clean 73. Rasheena: Mmm hmm. 74. Imani: prissy. Ok, someone else, [Hands raised: Bethany, Cheryl, Nikki] yes, go ahead Bethany. [Imani searches in her bag for something] 281 75. Bethany: My parents never really restricted me from activities or toys or anything just because I was a girl. I had Hot Wheels and I had Barbies, and I had a play kitchen and I had like a hockey stick [Student and instructor laughter] 76. Imani: Mmm hmm. 77. Bethany: So, yeah, serious street hockey, ok? [Student and instructor laughter. Imani puts her bag back on the floor and puts a flash drive on the table] 78. Bethany: Um, they pretty much taught me that like girls can do anything boys can do and I was never really forced to like confine myself to 79. Imani: To one. Ok, good, good. 80. Mary: [aside] Unfortunately, the Mary quickly responds to the comments sentiment raised by Bethany that shared by Bethany about her “girls can do anything boys can experiences being raised to believe that do” is not always echoed she could do or be anything. It is throughout girls’ schooling important to note that as girls and experiences. Here Bethany jokes women have become more visibly about having played with Barbies integrated within arenas and activities and a play kitchen as well as Hot that were previously for only men, that Wheels and a hockey stick. Too there has been considerable backlash. many girls, however, end up This backlash has come in many forms, getting sent messages within their including the claim that boys and men experiences of schooling about are now being discriminated against. As 282 what they can’t do and being a result, experiences like Bethany’s dissuaded from math/science fields speak to progress that has been made, and other activities that are deemed however the adamant response by Mary “boys only.” It is great to hear to clarify that Bethany’s experience is stories like Bethany’s where she exceptional, in a good way, reminds us did not feel forced to confine that there is still much work to be done herself to certain activities or in order to achieve gender equality. aspirations. 81. Imani: [Hands raised: Cheryl, Tonya, Nikki] Yes, Nikki. [puts flash drive into laptop] 82. Nikki: Umm, I remember that my mom used to, umm, cuz I used to play with my cousins all the time 83. Imani: Mmm hmm. 84. Nikki: And so I would want to be around them all the time, and they was all boys, and know she said to me to stop playing with them before I turned into a boy. 85. Imani: Mmmm. [Student and instructor laughter] 86. Imani: So very explicit [Student and instructor laughter. Imani reaches to her neck at her necklace that has fallen off] 87. Imani: about that. Mmm hmm. 88. Nikki: And, yeah, 283 89. Imani: Ok 90. Nikki: the same thing, like Rasheena went, she used to keep my hair in pigtails 91. Imani: And styled. 92. Nikki: Polish our nails pink 93. Imani: Mmm hmm 94. Nikki: and make me wear skirts 95. Imani: Mmm hmm 96. Nikki: and stuff like that. 97. Imani: So messages around what to wear, how to look 98. Nikki: Oh 99. Imani: That kind of thing 100. Alice: [aside] It is evident that the Alice hones in on the interaction instructor can relate to the between the instructor and the African experiences of Nikki and Rasheena American women in the class. By paying based on her additions to their close attention to what the instructor comments. Not only does Imani responds to and how she responds gives respond to these students’ Alice evidence to demonstrate the comments with “mmm hmm”s and necessity of examining issues of gender other acknowledgments, she also and education through relationships and elaborates on what they are stories. The fact that Imani is able to not sharing. When Rasheena was only respond to, but also add onto the talking about her Granny teaching comments of these students’ stories her how “girls were supposed to shows us that she can relate to their 284 be,” Imani added in “very neat, experiences, at least somewhat. And, very clean” and “prissy.” In the although the instructor does not tell her same way, when Nikki was sharing own stories that stand apart from those about wearing her hair in of her students, she contributes by “pigtails,” Imani added, “and sharing alongside these African styled” to the student’s comments. American women students. The position I would argue that this is one way of the interactions between Imani and that Imani can convey her the African American women in the class experiences as an African being situated between Bethany’s American girl growing up in the sharing also allows us to examine the U.S. and develop relationships ways the instructor responds to these with her African American women students’ comments differently and students. It is also interesting that points to the relationship and rapport these interactions are right before that has and can be established by and after Bethany’s sharing about shared experiences on the part of the how she was taught that girls could instructor and her students. do anything boys could do. The juxtaposition of experiences shared by these students, two African American women and one White woman, shed light on the sometimes differing messages that girls receive growing up based on 285 race, gender and other social characteristics. 101. Nikki: Quick, I got one more thing. 102. Imani: Yeah [Hands raised: Summer, Cheryl, Terrance, Nikki. Imani begins to reattach her necklace] 103. Nikki: And I remember when I was in school, I think I was like first grade, I don’t know who made this poem, but I remember it was this poem that we had to recite. 104. Imani: Mmm hmm. 105. Nikki: And I know in the poem it always used to, it said that, umm, ladies should be seen and not heard. 106. Imani: Yeah 107. Nikki: I don’t know [indistinguishable] 108. Imani: [talking with her hands with the ends of the necklace in each hand] I’ve hear-, I I don’t know either, but that is a common phrase, right? How many other people have heard that phrase? [Several students raise their hands including Christopher, Rasheena, Bethany, Monica, Rhonda, Ashlee and Aisha. Terrance and Summer’s hands were already raised prior to the question. Summer raises her hand a little higher. Peter does not raise his hand.] 109. Peter: I’ve heard it about kids 110. Christopher: Yeah 111. Imani: Women should be seen not heard? 286 112. Rasheena: Kids [Additional student comments including other ‘yeahs’ and ‘kids’] 113. Imani: You said what? 114. Peter: Kids, kids 115. Imani: Oh, about kids too, yeah, mmm hmm. [Hands raised: Summer & Terrance (never lowered hands)] Summer [Imani tries again to reattach her necklace] 116. Summer: Umm, 117. Rhonda: I heard that 118. Summer: I remember, like my my parents were the same like they didn’t really restrict you know like, you know, certain toys or whatever 119. Imani: Mmm hmm [Walks a bit closer to Summer while still trying to attach her necklace] 120. Summer: but I, I always remember like around holidays, like, my sister and I were always expected to help my mom with like baking 121. Imani: Mmm hmm, mmm hmm. 122. Summer: Or when my family came over, like, you know, we would always make taffy or buckeyes 123. Imani: Sure. [Walks closer yet to Summer and crosses her arms] 124. Summer: or something, and like my brother never used to be involved when those 125. Imani: In those [indistinguishable] 126. Summer: Like kind of things. And he, he would like be watching football or something, but then like we would have to spend like all day like baking all these things for 287 127. Imani: Mmm hmm, mmm hmm 128. Summer: Them to eat [laugh] 129. Imani: Very interesting. [Terrance raises his hand. Imani walks toward the computer podium and with her back to Terrance waves her left hand toward him] Yeah, Terrance. 130. Terrance: I was gonna say, I like the Easy-Bake-Oven [Student laughter. Imani stops behind the computer podium and nods her head] 131. Terrance: [sitting forward with a big smile on his face] It was good – the chocolate cakes and whatnot, but, you know I had si- like 6 older brothers, so the likelihood of me like gettin’ to play with that, was like 132. Imani: Right 133. Terrance: you know, very, very slim, you know, cuz I was always told boys were supposed to be tough, you know 134. Imani: Mmm hmm. 135. Terrance: That’s true. 136. Imani: So this message around toughness. 137. Terrance: Yeah. And work hard and whatnot. 138. Imani: Yup, yup. 139. Peter: They had the queasy bake [Aisha raises her hand. Imani moves to the next question without calling on Aisha] 140. Imani: Ok. Now, third question brings it back to how, how then these messages made you think about yourself, alright, so let’s get a few comments there. [Hands raised: Tonya, Maria, Cheryl, Marcus] Maria. 288 141. Maria: Umm, it always made me feel like I wasn’t girly enough. 142. Imani: Mmmm. 143. Maria: I’m very tomboyish 144. Imani: Mmm hmm. 145. Maria: And it made me, I feel like I have more male characteristics than I do female characteristics 146. Imani: Mmm hmm. [Walks from behind the computer podium and toward Maria] 147. Maria: And it kinda sucks sometimes, cuz I would like to be girly, I just don’t, and 148. Imani: Just wasn’t you 149. Maria: Yeah, I just, yeah 150. Imani: Yeah, mmm hmm, ok. [Hands raised: Nikki, Aisha, Tonya, Marcus] Marcus 151. Marcus: To be totally honest, umm, as a child I thought I was gay, umm 152. Imani: [standing in the center of the classroom in front of Marcus with her hands behind her back] Mmm 153. Marcus: Because in my mind I, I didn’t know about the required sexual, uh, requirement of being homosexual or whatever 154. Imani: Mmm hmm [begins to cross her arms and then reaches to catch her necklace which has fallen off again] 155. Marcus: But like in elementary school it was like “Aw, you gay” like you we’d say that all the time 156. Imani: [has turned and gone back around by the computer podium to put her necklace in her purse] Right 289 157. Marcus: And I thought it was just actin’ like a girl, and every time my Dad he’d be like, “Strengthen your wrists boy.” [Student and instructor laughter. Imani puts her purse back on the floor] 158. Marcus: And so like me and my brothers used to stay up super late like laughing, just actin’ crazy and stuff, and this was like six through ten or whatever 159. Imani: [now standing next to table by computer with one hand on the table and the other hand on her hip] Uh huh, uh huh 160. Marcus: And he would say, “Stop all that gigglin’, y’all gigglin’, like girls.” And, I’m like [Heavy student and instructor laughter] 161. Marcus: Now, now when I think about it, our voices were already high, like 162. Imani: Right 163. Marcus: I don’t understand 164. Imani: They were not that deep [Heavy student and instructor laughter and indistinguishable comments/discussion] 165. Imani: Ok, so making [Marcus makes a deep, mocking, laugh, and students and instructor continue to laugh. Hands raised: Nikki (never fully lowered), Cheryl, Aisha, Laura] 166. Imani: So making you fee-, again, sounds like Maria, this notion of feeling like you’re not conforming to what you should be conforming to. 167. Judith: [aside] Here again, you can Here you can see Judith picking up on see the ways that transcending the nuances of how gender is being gender norms can lead to discipline performed here in this classroom, as 290 and correction that urges people to well as interrogating and pointing out conform to the binary system of the ways that gender performances are gender performance. Marcus situated within historical and political shares his experiences growing up contextual relations of power within and and being told by his father that he beyond this class. This excerpt examines needed to stop giggling with his the continued use of discipline with brothers “like girls” and to children to teach them what “strengthen his wrists.” Marcus performances of gender are not was sent the message that acting in appropriate. This pattern of behavior feminine ways was unacceptable. shows how children and their parents He also grew up believing that make choices about how to, and how not being gay was about acting like a to, behave in ways that discursively girl, further demonstrating that reproduce and maintain the boundaries discourses of gender and sexuality of what it means to be “boy,” “girl,” are often conflated. Additionally, “man,” or “woman” within the binary notice the way that laughter, an system of gender. The commentary also incredibly powerful tool that can explores the interconnection between be used to invoke power in performances of gender and sexuality, relationship with others, erupts namely the use of homophobia as a when certain examples of gender weapon to reinforce performances of non-conformity are discussed. “boy” and “man.” Within this segment Throughout the stories that Marcus Judith also points us to the relational shared there was boisterous and dynamics within the classroom between 291 frequent laughter from other Marcus, the instructor and the other students as well as the instructor. students specific to laughter. Examining This laughter provides Marcus an the use of laughter as a tool to maintain opportunity to maintain his and deploy power shows further the personal power by joking about the performativity of gender within this stories and as a result distancing classroom. It is extremely important to him from the vulnerability Judith to look at the multiple associated with sharing such perspectives and relationships between intimate and potentially emotional laughter and power relations as they memories. play out within this class session. 168. Mary: [aside] It is notable, After hearing Judith’s commentary however, that when Maria shared about the use of laughter as a tool of her experiences of not feeling like power relations, Mary brings us back to she has been able to conform to the thinking about viewing the classroom, gender norms expected of her as a and society, through the lens of gender woman that there was no joking inequality. Reflecting on the stories and no laughter as a result. To me, shared by students about feeling like this speaks to the seriousness of the they do not conform, Mary focuses her impact of the expectations and attention on the ways that women in this pressure placed on women to classroom, the instructor included, conform to the roles of woman, function within a larger system of gender wife, mother, caretaker, and often bias and discrimination that weighs on 292 superwoman within their lives, every comment and interaction. families and society as a whole. Specifically, Mary remarks about how Just as Imani explicitly stated at the boisterous laughter within and in the start of this class period that response to Marcus’ sharing does not she was “tired,” for women the arise within and around Maria’s weight and burden of not living up contribution along similar lines (gender to the standards women expect non-conformity). These examples lead themselves to live up to is Mary to conclude that the tone and immense. And so, although Imani presentation of the stories shared by draws connections between the Maria, Marcus and others are tempered sentiments shared by Marcus about by the overarching and pervasive system of his father, the difference in the of sexism within which these stories are ways Maria and Marcus presented situated. According to Mary, the impacts their stories (one very seriously of interacting with gender norms for and the other in a joking manner) girls and women are more deeply felt, and the ways their stories were and therefore presented here in this received by the other students and scene in a more serious manner. the instructor (again, one very seriously and the other in a joking manner) speaks to the distinct ways that girls and women are more deeply impacted by the effects of 293 the sexist and unequal society that we live in. [Hands raised: Laura (never fully lowered), Nikki, Aisha, Tonya] 169. Imani: Aisha [walks in front of the computer podium and leans back on it with one elbow] 170. Aisha: The messages that were portrayed made me like think that I had to like do gender like be a cheerleader 171. Imani: Oh, uh huh 172. Aisha: You know what I’m sayin’ like 173. Imani: Perform certain roles 174. Aisha: Yeah, perform certain roles, like 175. Imani: Mmm hmm 176. Aisha: Be a cheerleader 177. Imani: Mmm hmm 178. Aisha: Dance, join the choir 179. Imani: Sure, mmm hmm 180. Aisha: Just do the stuff that girls do. That’s it 181. Imani: Mmm hmm, mmm hmm. [Hands raised: Laura (never fully lowered), Tonya, Cheryl, Nikki] Laura 182. Laura: Umm, my parents were pretty like gender neutral when I was growing up, just like they’d let me go off like rough and play, my like none of my, umm, like my room wasn’t really pink 294 183. Imani: Pink or [trailing off, indistinguishable response from instructor] 184. Laura: And stuff, whatever, that wasn’t really their thing. They were never really like ooh, be a girl, like my dad took me hunting and fishing and stuff 185. Imani: Mmm hmm 186. Laura: But then my brother got older and he kinda started doing that stuff and then I got steered, moving into more like the feminine 187. Imani: Activities 188. Laura: Activities and stuff 189. Imani: And things, uh huh 190. Laura: And now it’s, my mom is very like, ever since I’ve been in like fourth or fifth grade [Imani walks around behind the computer podium] 191. Imani: Mmm hmm 192. Laura: She’s very all about like always look your best 193. Imani: Mmm hmm 194. Laura: Be polite 195. Imani: Mmm hmm 196. Laura: Umm, like I would get my hands slapped off the table, like 197. Imani: Uh huh, uh huh 198. Laura: Like if my manners weren’t good type thing like don’t [instructor talking over end of sentence] [Tonya never fully lowers her hand until Imani makes the following concluding comments] 295 199. Imani: Yeah, I mean these, yeah. It sounds like these things, from the comments we’ve heard, people felt like they weren’t conforming, right, to those roles, and so feeling boxed in, [Imani walks to her left and bumps into the chair there which she then moves farther left to stand behind the table freely] feeling like you had to, um, conform or and p-, p-, perform. I think, who were our, umm, was it Tonya, Rhonda and Jane posted for today? [Non-verbal, or inaudible affirmative response(s)] 200. Imani: Yeah, you all should read their posts. Umm, I thought they were very interesting connected to the readings, which is what we’re about to segue into, but, umm, you know, this notion of performing gender, doing gender. And thinking about just in your every day activities, how do you do gender? [uses air quotes with “do gender”] How do you perform gender roles? Umm, is it through the way you dress, or the way you think, or, umm, you know, what you wear. How do you do gender, because we all perform it in various ways. [Walking back to computer podium] And we may perform more closer to the norm, or further away from the norm. 201. Judith: [aside] Exactly! Imani is It is extremely important for Judith to urging her students here to highlight the instructor’s use of interrogate the ways that they language here. Imani specifically refers perform gender, insisting “we all to gender as being performed, instead of perform it in various ways.” It is innate, inevitable or inherent, which critically important to explore the connotes that individuals have choices ways that people perform or “do” about how, where and with who they will 296 gender, and the relations of power perform gender, and in what ways. associated with the relative Examining specific situations, normalcy or rebellion against circumstances and interactions where normalcy that play out on people “do” gender falls right in line individual and societal scales. with Postmodern Feminist theories of gender. 202. Alice: [aside] Yes, and looking at Alice’s focus remains on examining the intersections between multiple where the instructor and students within identity positions related to race, this class share personal stories that gender, and social class can also emphasize the inextricable connections illuminate the complexity of how between race, class, gender, and other experiences of people and students social and cultural identity from various identities and characteristics. Alice looks for places positionalities can increase our where the instructor made choices to understanding of gender issues in include, or not, her own personal stories multicultural teacher education. because of the natural way that her The instructor herself could have experiences would bring race and social even added more to this activity class into the discussions. From Alice’s and the discussion about it by point of view, specifically including sharing her own stories, a natural questions and comments that open the way to incorporate the intersection discussion to include explicit content on of race, gender and class identity how people’s lived experiences is crucial 297 characteristics. Making these to understand the complexity of what is relationships more explicit would taught about gender and education enhance this discussion even more! within, and beyond, this multicultural teacher education course. Act 1, Scene 2: Free Writing [Take Two] – Reflections. Primary issues raised by Mary, Alice and Judith involved the location of the students in the classroom, the interaction between the instructor and the students, the choice and structure of the activity free writing activity, and the ways the comments and stories shared by the students reflected the three perspectives – Womanism, Postmodern Feminism, and Liberal Feminism. Let’s take some time now to unpack and examine the commentaries provided by Alice, Judith and Mary throughout this scene. Looking back at the initial discussion questions posed by the three women, we can see how each of them has honed in on specific issues stemming from the larger focal questions and ideas I posed to operationalize my research question. And, although these women wouldn’t have had the opportunity to offer these questions prior to the start of the scenes of these class sessions, I created them in retrospect and then positioned them prior to each scene in order to help guide readers and viewers of the play to navigate the content with respect to each of the theoretical perspectives. With all of the scenes, as you can see with this one, there is not parity among the perspectives with regards to the number of questions offered by each of the theorists. The questions were generated in order to support observers and analyzers of this play in examining what happens with each theoretical perspective in mind. 298 It is notable that Judith’s focus is predominantly on interrogating the ways the instructor and the students are creating instances that demonstrate what gender is, through their language, their interaction and through their location. She highlights parts of the scene that speak to gender performance or how people “do” gender within and beyond the binary system (boy/girl). Judith also points out and adds to the instructor’s use of language that promotes an understanding of gender as performance, helping us to discuss reflections on the question, “What does the instructor mean when she talks about “doing gender”?” And, Judith also points out how the free writing activity itself was framed within the traditional binary system of gender and gendered power relations that reinforce a two-gender reality within our culture and our classrooms. This framing of the activity, according to Judith, could have had an impact on the ways the students both interpreted and engaged in the activity. The stories that students told about their experiences growing up and not conforming to the norms of their expected gender roles were of particular interest to Judith. Judith’s comments on these students’ stories respond to the guiding question, “In what ways do students share personal experiences that transcend the traditional boy/girl binary system of gender?” Judith highlights how children and adults learn and reinforce gender norms and power relations by being “corrected” in circumstances and interactions where their behaviors falls outside the box of “girl” or “boy” for children, and “man” or “woman” for adults. This also leads to a discussion of, “What kinds of comments from which students elicit boisterous laughter from both students and the instructor?” Judith points out that the students and the instructor erupt in laughter as Marcus shares his story about transcending the gender binary as a child. 299 The perspective brought to light by Alice is one that focuses on the experiences shared and enacted within the classroom that show the interconnection between multiple identities, specifically race and gender. Alice comments on the relationships that are established related to race and gender identities through the locations of the students and the instructor in the classroom, the interactions between and among all of them, and the stories and histories that the instructor and the students share, or do not share, within this classroom. These comments respond to the guiding question, “What can we learn about gender and race based on the location of the students and instructor in the classroom?” The free writing activity allowed for students to reflect upon their unique experiences growing up and learning about gender, which are inevitably linked with their multiple identity characteristics included, but not limited to, their racial and social class identities. Based on the location of the students in the classroom, African American women were able to share more intimately with each other in the pair-sharing part of the free writing activity. The instructor was also able to share with the African American women in her responses to their stories. This points to a possible reason why these students may have chosen their seats in closer proximity to the instructor, as well as each other. And so, in addition to responding to the guiding question on the location of the students, these comments by Alice also responds to the questions, “How do the experiences shared here by the students differ based on race and gender?” and, “How does the instructor interact with her students in ways that demonstrates shared understanding and experiences?” 300 Alice also speaks to the possibilities available to the instructor to explicitly include issues of multiple identity characteristics into activities that encourage students to reflect on and share their personal stories. This discussion responds to the guiding question, “In what ways could the instructor have incorporated multiple identity characteristics into the free writing exercise?” One possible way to do this, Alice suggests, is for the instructor to discuss her own reflections on the free writing activities and making the connections for students between multiple identity issues, especially gender, social class and race. Alice doesn’t specifically answer the question, “Why do you think the instructor might not share her own personal experiences in this class session?” However, the question is there to remind us that through the sharing of personal experiences the instructor could have more explicitly bridged the issues of gender, race, and social class. Mary, on the other hand, focuses her attention to the situations and content that center on issues of gender bias and discrimination. Stories about gender differences or gender roles that put girls and women at a disadvantage or circumstances within the classroom that might promote or inhibit gender equality are of particular interest to Mary. These stories, Mary points out, respond to the guiding question, “In what ways do the students’ experiences growing up reflect gender bias and discrimination?” In particular, you see Mary commenting on the theme raised by female students in the class that they were unable to act in certain ways or participate in activities because they were girls. According to Mary, the sexist attitudes and behaviors of parents and other family members that restricted the expression and participation of girls served to recreate gender bias and discrimination. Mary points out the many comments by students that 301 support her liberal feminist perspective. In contrast, one female student, Bethany, comments that she was raised to believe that “girls can do anything boys can do.” Although Mary acknowledges this comment, she also takes the opportunity to remind the audience that Bethany’s experience is uncommon given the pervasive sexist and discriminatory beliefs and practices of this society. What Maria shares later in the discussion underscores this point as she described her struggles with not conforming to the expectations placed upon her as a girl and woman. For Mary, this is further evidence of the disproportionate impact on girls and women of gender roles and the burden of not living up to societal expectations of what a girl or woman “should” be and do. Mary comments in this scene in response to the inner-monologue offered by the instructor where she discusses her attempts to balance the participation of her students related to gender and other cultural attributes. The question that points to this concern, “The instructor mentions that she tries to call on students equally by gender. How successful do you think she is with this?” remains unanswered at this early stage of the class period. However, Mary does intend to return to this issue and plans to monitor the teacher/student interaction with regard to who is called on. As the scenes progress, it is my hope that you are beginning to see how the stories of this instructor, these students, the researcher and our three commentary providers, Judith, Alice and Mary, unfold and interact with each other as the class sessions continue. As we explore together what is taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course, insights and interrogations of the content, the teacher moves and the student moves abound! I can’t wait to see what comes next! 302 Act 1, Scene 2: Free Writing [Take Two] – Meta-Analysis. In choosing to analyze and write this dissertation in large part in the format of a play, there were both challenges and opportunities that arise along with that choice. The opportunities, in my opinion, far outweigh the challenges, however it is important to discuss the various impacts of the format on the construction of the play. In particular, it is necessary to be transparent about and offer insight on the choices that I made as the playwright of this dissertation. Within this scene there are aside comments from Judith, Alice and Mary from their respective theoretical perspectives, Postmodern Feminism, Womanism, and Liberal Feminism. Their voices provide commentaries on the questions posed at the beginning of the scene in alignment with their particular viewpoints. And, although their comments are not meant to be answers to the questions in the sense that they are the “correct” and “true” answers, nor even the “best” answers, their thoughts provide us with additional discussion points related to the guiding questions and idea from within each of the theoretical perspectives that simultaneously add to the discussion of the overarching research question of this project, “What was taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course?” This section I am calling the Meta-Analysis is an opportunity for me to provide some connections between, and extensions on, the commentaries provided by Mary, Alice and Judith, the guiding questions posed at the beginning of the scene, and the larger research question. As you can see, within “Take Two” of the script I have added a twocolumn format where alongside Alice, Judith and Mary’s commentaries I have included additional descriptive and explanatory comments that discuss in more detail what the 303 women are commenting on and why. The original comments offered by the three women are presented within the original format of the play were crafted to highlight various issues observed while still maintaining a conversational approach that would make sense within the flow of a performance of the script. Here in “Take Two” I have included the original comments from each of the women and then delved deeper into the content and motivations behind their reflections. In taking a step back from the actual writing of the commentaries provided by Alice, Mary, and Judith, we can begin to see the bigger picture that emerges from the data, analysis and writing of this project. From this vantage point, looking at this scene on the whole and my presentation and analysis of it altogether, what is being generated through this play is a picture of what is taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course. And, specifically, 1) how gender bias is taught, 2) How the concepts of race, class and gender taught through the use of narratives, and 3) a story of the complexity of the teaching of gendered performances. 1. How is gender bias taught? Within this scene, gender bias is taught in the construction of the free writing activity, in the student comments shared in response to the free writing questions, and in the instructor’s attempts to call on her students equally. This is not to say that all of these instances are promoting gender bias, for the most part to the contrary. However, the structure and presentation of these instances within the class period can be seen and allow us to see the liberal feminist theoretical framework and related discourses being played out. Through the construction of the free writing questions, students were prompted to write about and then discuss their experiences growing up and how they 304 learned roles for being boys and girls. Their responses, or at least the ones shared during the class discussion, in large part reinforce stereotypical ideas and responses about gender roles and the inequality therein. And, lastly, the inner-monologue added by the instructor sheds light on her awareness of employing gender and cultural equality within her pedagogical practices. 2. How are the concepts of race, class and gender taught through the use of narratives? In this scene, we see the concepts of race, class and gender being taught through the use of narratives within the construction of the free writing activity, by the location of the students, through the stories shared by students, in the ways the instructor responds to some of the students, as well as through the missing narratives that could have been shared by the instructor. By engaging the students in reflection on, writing about, and sharing their childhood memories related to gender, the instructor has set up the class experience in a way that places value on their narratives. And, although the students are not explicitly prompted to write about and discuss the intersections of gender, race and class, their experiences are inherently gendered, racialized and situated within specific social class contexts. This is true for the times the instructor adds onto the comments of some of the African American women’s stories. And, also why Alice emphasizes the void created by the instructor’s relative silence about her own experiences. The location of the students allow for particular interaction and sharing, especially within the paired sharing component, and demonstrates the students’ comfort with sharing their stories with each other in certain ways. 3. I want to craft a story of the complexity of the teaching of gendered performances. 305 A story of the complexity of the teaching of gendered performances is crafted through the construction of the free writing activity, the comments shared by students that transcend the binary system of gender, in the instructor’s language about gender performance, and in the ways laughter is employed within the sharing by Marcus. The instructor sets up the free writing activity by explicitly naming the gender categories “boy” and “girl” which sets the students up to respond according to those labels and within the stereotypes they are familiar with. In spite of this, students wrote about and shared many experiences where they learned how “not” to be a “boy” or a “girl” as a way to learn how to be a “girl” or a “boy.” And, even so, some students expressed not feeling like they fit into those roles or expectations. Part of the construction of the sharing experience of one student, Marcus, is the use of humor, which evokes boisterous laughter about his experiences being disciplined for not performing his “proper” gender role as a boy. The instructor also uses language about how we “do” gender and that we all perform gender, which compexifies the static nature of the gender binary. Overall, this scene demonstrates and plays out the complex and contradictory messages that are being taught about gender and education within this multicultural teacher education course. As shown above, the construction of the free writing activity can be seen as simultaneously teaching us about gender bias, the experiences of the intersections of multiple identity characteristics, and the teaching of gendered performances. Depending on the perspective you take on the activity, the discussion thereafter, the particular interactions along the way, the language of the instructor, and much, much, more, you can and will see various storylines about what is being taught about gender and education. What is highlighted, what is important, and why all depends 306 on the perspective you take, and each perspective adds value to the discourses and understandings of gender and education within and beyond multicultural teacher education. Researcher Reflections What Was Taught about Gender in Teacher Education? As described at the beginning of this work, research related to gender issues within education, and by extension multicultural education, teacher education, and urban education, can be divided into three predominant categories: 1. Gender bias and discrimination 2. Gender as one of multiple aspects of identity 3. Gendered power relations Within the literature about gender bias and discrimination within teacher education, we have found that gender is scarcely addressed within teacher education programs (Zittleman & Sadker, 2002; 2003; Sadker, Sadker & Klein, 1991; Mader & King, 1995). Studies have shown that within teacher education programs that only approximately three percent of the content focused on gender (Zittleman & Sadker, 2002 & 2003). Sanders (1997), Pearson and Rooke (1993), and Sadker, Sadker and Klein (1991) emphasize the importance of the inclusion of gender issues within teacher education. These authors and researchers examined the implications of including gender within the curriculum and feminist pedagogy within teacher education courses. Jones (1989) furthered the research and discourse on gender bias and discrimination in education by concluding within their study on teacher-student interactions within physical science and chemistry teachers that significant bias existed in the amount and 307 type of interaction teachers had with their students related to gender. The existing research on gender bias and discrimination within teacher education concludes that increased inclusion of gender issues within teacher preparation programs would reduce the amount of gender bias and sexism within the classrooms of their students as future teachers (Jones, 1989; Poole & Isaacs, 1993; Sadker, Sadker & Klein, 1991; Pearson & Rooke, 1993; Sanders, 1997; Mader & King, 1995). Studies within teacher education that explores gender as one of multiple aspects of identity or interrogates gendered power relations are fewer and farther between. Despite the plethora of research within Multicultural Education that examines issues of race, gender, social class, sexual orientation, ability, language, and many additional identities and positionalities (Nieto, 2004; Sleeter & Grant, 2003; Banks & Banks, 2004; 2005; Gollnick & Chinn, 2002), Teacher Education as a field still remains largely disconnected from these discourses. This research advocates for the inclusion of multicultural pedagogy that incorporates multiple identity characteristics and their intersections in ways that encourage dialogue and self-reflection (Asher, 2007; Knight, 2002). Research examining gendered power relations within Teacher Education incorporates views of gender that are contextual, relational and co-created within dynamics of power and circumstance. Studies within the field of teacher education that incorporates issues of gender within contextualized relationships are rare. Ellis (1993), Hollingsworth (1995) and Baker and Richardson (2005) advocate for the inclusion of gender within teacher education in ways that acknowledge the constructions and deconstructions of gender within various contexts of power and opportunity. Encouraging 308 teacher candidates to explore their own gendered identities and subject positions is a common theme within these studies as well. I did not come across a single study situated within a teacher education classroom. Poole and Isaacs (1993) interviewed teacher educators related to gender equity, gender issues in education and incorporating gender into the curriculum. These authors explored topics including language, teaching techniques, and formal and informal teacher-student interactions, and found that considerable variation among teacher educators exists in their approaches and attitudes about the teaching gender issues (both explicitly and implicitly). Research of this type lays the foundation for further investigation within teacher education as a field. Several publications begin to address this void by describing efforts within teacher education related to teaching issues of gender. These writings introduce readers to ways in which teacher educators are responding to the calls to provide preservice teachers with opportunities to discuss and reflect upon the impact of gender discourses within education. Baker and Richardson (2005) describe a teacher education course they designed and implemented in South Africa. Ellis (1993) also sheds light on a teacher educator’s perspective on constructions of gender within teacher education. Asher (2007) examines her teaching strategies within a required multicultural teacher education course. She offers various vignettes based on her experiences as a teacher educator with the complexities of examining the intersectionality of multiple identities within multicultural teacher education. These researchers’ insights are supportive in investigating and questioning the ways we approach teaching and learning about gender within education. However, our ability to look into teacher education classrooms are limited to the 309 reflections provided by the authors. Knight (2002) focuses on the experiences of a working class African American female preservice teacher and her experiences within her teacher preparation program. And, although we gain much insight from Knight’s discussion of the importance of exploring the intersectionalities of multiple identities within teacher education, there is still a piece of the picture that remains missing, a view of this teacher education student’s classroom experiences. All of these studies point to important areas of exploration related to gender issues within teacher education. What this dissertation project offers to extend this research is that it enables readers to look within the walls of a teacher education classroom to explore and interrogate what is taught about gender and education. In addition to this transformative approach to research methodology, the writing of this researcher both enables readers to examine and question what is taught about gender and education within the multicultural teacher education classroom we enter into, and compels it’s audience to consider multiple theoretical perspectives on what it means to construct, and deconstruct, issues of gender. This dissertation project also affords opportunities and possibilities in exploring issues of gender from multiple perspectives. Earlier I presented the driving question and/or organizing idea for each of the theoretical perspectives employed to analyze the data I had collected. The driving question for the Liberal Feminist lens was, “How is gender bias taught?” The driving question for the Womanist lens was, “How are the concepts of race, class and gender taught through the use of narratives?” And, the organizing idea for the Postmodern Feminist lens was, “I want to craft a story of the complexity of the teaching of gendered performances.” Each guiding question/idea 310 corresponded with one of the categories of research on gender and education, thus enabling a simultaneous incorporation of all three perspectives of educational research on gender as well as the three theoretical lenses. What we know about what was taught about gender within this multicultural/urban teacher education course can now be stated succinctly in the following three statements that also mirror the three categories of related research above and stem from the driving questions and organizing idea of the three theoretical perspectives enacted by Mary, Alice, and Judith – Liberal Feminism, Womanism, and Postmodern Feminism: 1. Gender bias still exists 2. Gender can only be understood through narratives and in relationship with race and other aspects of identity 3. Gender is performed within specific contexts, relationships and power relations Table 4: Responding to the Research Question Theoretical perspective Liberal Feminism Driving question or organizing idea How is gender bias taught? Responses to the research question Womanism How are the concepts of race, class and gender taught through the use of narratives? Gender can only be understood through narratives and in relationship with race and other aspects of identity Postmodern Feminism I want to craft a story of the complexity of the teaching of gendered performances. Gender is performed within specific contexts, relationships and power relations 311 Gender bias still exists As you have been able to see throughout the scenes and stories of this classroom, the liberal feminist analysis of gender and education that has been most prevalent within the discourses of teacher education and multicultural education is still very much relevant. The ways that gender bias and discrimination were talked about and played out within these pages is quite evident within patterns of communication and interaction, within the course content, in the stories shared by the students, and much more. Further, the need for and presence of multiple other complementary and contradictory perspectives was demonstrated and generated through these scenes and narratives as well. To see gender as one of many aspects of identity in inextricable connection with race, class and other characteristics of selves is a step toward better understanding the lived experiences of people of various identities and positionalities. We saw this within the sharing of personal experiences both by the instructor and her students, within the videos shown during these class periods, as well as in the casual interactions between Imani and students. This deepens and enriches the conversation about gender and education across the multiple fields and discourses navigated here, and beyond. And, to evoke, construct, deconstruct, question and perform gender within specific contexts, interactions, locations, histories, and power relations is inevitable. To recognize and utilize them to create and demonstrate more nuanced and complex productions of gender in education is the challenge and the promise of widening and broadening our minds and bodies, opening to possibilities, opportunities and juxtapositions. Through these scenes, crafted in the language and interactions of the instructor and the students of this course within these two class sessions, these performances were both evident and interrogated in ways that 312 are both unmistakable and ultimately greatly impactful on the future discourses of gender in multicultural teacher education and all its related fields. Implications: So What? Every step of the way through this project, I came back to one central question. Surprisingly, even to me, this was not my research question. The question I constantly had on my mind in completing this dissertation was, “So what?” It has been crucial to me to push myself to answer that question, not in a superficial way, in a very real way. Even though finishing this dissertation is the last step for me in completing my PhD in Curriculum, Teaching and Educational Policy within the Department of Teacher Education, and would thus allow me to move on to all that I desire to pursue thereafter, there had to be something more to drive me. All of this time, effort, writing, analysis and hoop-jumping needed to be for something more than the addition of 3 more letters after my name. I wanted to make a difference, within myself, and within the fields of multicultural education, teacher education, and urban education. The entire intention behind this project has been to create dialogue, research and teaching that expands the ways we understand, talk about, and teach about gender within education, and by extension multicultural education, teacher education and urban education. That has been my ongoing answer to my own “So what?” question that lingers just in front of the completion of this project. And, I appreciate the question, even more than the answer, every day to keep my writing, research and life’s work in alignment with and in integrity related to the demonstration of the answer. That’s all fine and good, you say, however with all due respect, “So what?” 313 Precisely! And so, I will give you some answers. I see four primary outcomes of this research that have the possibility to impact the lives of teacher educators, teacher candidates, and the fields of teacher education and multicultural education at large. 1. Expansion of vocabulary Being able to understand and interrogate gender and education as a part of our vocabulary in new ways is one of the greatest outcomes of this study. Whenever you hear about issues of gender and education from here forward, the question will linger, “What is meant by gender and education in this study or context?” Being able to understand and question the ways that gender is included, or not, in conversations and initiatives within multicultural education is of the utmost importance. 2. Multiplicity and complexity of voices and stories Knowing that any one story is partial is another crucial outcome of this study. The multiple, complementary and yet contradictory stories and voices that gender and education, gender and multicultural education, and their adjacent and overlapping fields and discourses are what add great nuance and depth to the production and deconstruction of gender. This research brings this forth through its ideologies and methodologies. 3. A view of what could be undertaken This research leaves doors wide open for research that explores and interrogates gender and education within any, or all, of the fields of teacher education, multicultural education, urban education, and beyond. Existing at 314 the crossroads of theoretical perspectives, subjectivities, positionalities and discourses, this research can be a bridge to further research in many regards. 4. The opportunities of a new teaching tool Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, to me, is that this is not just a dissertation. This is not merely a big book to be written, defended, submitted, and sat on a shelf in a library never to be read again. Beyond being read, it is my intention that this dissertation provides not only opportunities for further research, yet that it will also be taken up as a teaching tool itself and serve as an example for how educational research can be generative in ways to improve our discourses and approaches to teaching. And so, I have answered the “So what?” question as adequately as I possibly can. But, of course, I am the researcher and that is my responsibility. In reality, for me, in order for the “So what?” question to be answered, this would require someone, or many people, beyond myself. If any part or parts of this dissertation and/or the play I have included within the writing of it would be read and used by any teacher, researcher, or administrator, I will have achieved my goal and answered the “So what?” question in an honorable and respectful manner. The point, my point, is to change the landscape of education. I know in my heart that the writing of this dissertation will, in fact, it already has. Asé. Limitations. Based on my selection of research methods, generalizability is certainly a limitation of my study. Although, given my research methodology is employing feminist poststructuralism, I do not see this as a limitation in any way. It is not my attempt, nor my 315 goal, to produce research that would be generalizable. As a researcher, I see it as my responsibility to “evoke” those that engage the stories I will create as opposed to any attempt to describe or incite anything concrete in particular (Tyler, 123). Another limitation that could be posed is the conflicting roles that I have maintained in relation to the course I am conducting my study on. Given that I taught TE 201 for several years, it could be seen that my objectivity of the content and the interactions of the course could be impacted. I do not deny this. However, I do not see this as a limitation either. Again, given the interrogation of researcher subjectivities involved in feminist poststructural methodologies, I see my own involvement in teaching and coordinating the course as a necessary and important part of my study. Conclusions To engage in a case study such as this opens up possibilities for the teacher educator, the researcher, and even the teacher candidates involved to think more complexly about their conceptions of gender, gender and teacher education, and gender and education more broadly. This, in turn, opens the fields of Multicultural Education and Multicultural Teacher Education to the possibilities of looking at gender issues less monolithically. Further, my study extends and deepens understandings of Liberal Feminism, Womanism, and Postmodern Feminism within the realms of education, as well as adds to the limited number of studies that engage feminist poststructural methodologies of research within educational research. 316 APPENDICES 317 Appendix A: Play Coding Key 1. Original text from the transcript is included as black text. For example: Ex. Imani: What are your earliest… Ex. Rhonda: I heard that 2. Stage direction is included as bracketed black text Ex. [Quiet while students were writing] Ex. [directed at Christopher] 3. Lines included where the speaker was unclear Ex. Cheryl: Mmm hmm 4. Inner-monologues by the instructor are included as black text highlighted yellow Ex. Imani: [aside] Students generally don’t… 5. Commentary added by the researcher is included as pink text Ex. Researcher: [aside] Cool! I introduced… 6. Additional characters created by the researcher to comment on the text of the transcript are inserted throughout with the following color codes: a. Alice who adds Womanist commentary is in purple text Ex. Alice: [aside] It is a very important… b. Judith who adds Postmodern Feminist commentary is in green text Ex. Judith: [aside] Exactly. It is critically… c. Mary who adds Liberal Feminist commentary is in blue text Ex. Mary: [aside] Violence against women… 318 Appendix B: Teaching Guide Table of Contents. 1. Introduction 2. Overview 3. How to Use this Play as a Teaching Tool 4. Theoretical Lenses 5. What is Taught about Gender in Teacher Education? 6. Guiding Questions 319 Introduction. Teachers, scholars, administrators, and host of other stakeholders within fields of education have been talking about the topic of gender within education for decades. Gender remains an extremely important topic for research, teaching and the administration of schools. There is a host of research that demonstrates the ways in which education is delivered and received differently based on gender. Much of this literature focuses on issues of gender bias and discrimination. Experiences of girls and women within education continue to be impacted by unequal treatment, sexism and stereotypes that portray feminine qualities as less desirable, weaker and less valuable to society. However, there are additional stories that can be told to increase our understanding of gender in education in more complex and nuanced ways. Teachers, administrators and researchers are recognizing the importance of the diversity of identities and experiences among their student populations. As a result, it is crucial to examine the ways that gender and race, as well as other identity characteristics, combine to create unique and differentiated experiences for students and teachers within the contexts of schools. Beyond this, there is also increasing attention to interrogating specific contextual, historical and political factors and issues of power contribute to how we see and enact gender. These additional ways of understanding and questioning gender issues within education enable us to explore and enrich our knowledge and teaching practices for all students. 320 Overview. This play has been written as a teaching tool for educators within the field of education. Specifically, this play has been designed to explore the ways that gender is taught within multicultural and urban teacher education contexts. However, the application of what is presented here reaches far beyond the particular subject of gender. In the training of teachers and the teaching of students from kindergarten (and even earlier) through college (and even beyond), it is imperative that we are continuously and rigorously examining what we teach, the ways that we teach, as well as the interactions between students, teachers, and that which is being taught. The play takes place within the context of a multicultural teacher education course with an urban education focus. Looking at what is taught about gender within this unique context can serve as a model for educators within and beyond classrooms to interrogate and expand our conceptions of what is being taught (implicitly, explicitly and by omission). In this play, the theoretical perspectives of Liberal Feminism, Womanism, and Postmodern Feminism are employed to begin a journey that urges audiences to view and interpret the teaching of gender in more complex ways. These perspectives will be described in detail within this teaching guide in the section called Theoretical Lenses. By utilizing multiple theoretical lenses, we can deepen and broaden our understanding of what is taught, and thus become smarter, more effective, and ultimately more transformative educators. And, through the use of this theatrical approach, we can both stretch ourselves to apply creativity within our teaching, and have some fun in the process. Through these means, engagement in what is being taught increases and new pedagogical possibilities emerge for students and teachers alike. Additionally, seeing 321 what happens within this course can provide audiences an opportunity to reflect on how the teaching of gender within teacher education, multicultural education and urban education can be explored and ultimately enhanced as we navigate the terrain of educating teachers and students within and beyond the classroom. The script of this play is based largely on the transcript of two class sessions of an actual multicultural/urban teacher education course. These two days of a semester-long course were focused specifically on the topic of gender. To protect the identities of the students and the instructor of the course, I have designated pseudonyms for use in this play. In addition to the dialogue and activities that occurred on those two class days, I have also included lines that incorporate inner-monologues of the instructor as well as comments from myself as the researcher in the classroom in order to provide additional context specific to my knowledge of the course generally and my experiences with the instructor and students prior to the two class periods on gender. Lastly, in order to bring to life the three theoretical perspectives that I have used to look at this class, I have created three characters, Mary, Judith and Alice. These characters will interject their thoughts and ideas along the way adding insight from their particular lens. Alice will speak from the womanist perspective, Mary represents the liberal feminist perspective, and Judith will bring light to postmodern feminist interrogations of the happenings. When any of the characters speak beyond the happenings within the classroom (activities, discussion, and interaction among the students and the instructor), the instructor and students of the class will not hear or interact with them. The additional voices are intended as commentary to guide viewers to interrogate what is taught about gender within this multicultural/urban teacher education classroom. 322 How to Use this Play as a Teaching Tool. There are multiple ways that this play can be used as a teaching tool. In this teaching guide, will highlight three ways: 1. Full Performance 2. Selected Scenes 3. Script Analysis With each of these methods of using this play, following up with a facilitated discussion would maximize the depth and breadth of analysis. As a result, I have also provided a list of guiding questions to go with each scene (see Guiding Questions) 323 Theoretical Lenses. Liberal Feminism. Liberal Feminism, born out of the political theory of liberalism, is a perspective that focuses on equality between men and women. Women’s rights and access to equal opportunities and society have been fought for and achieved by people supporting Liberal Feminism. Discrimination against women in sectors including education, employment, and politics are some of the main issues that have been combated by Liberal Feminism. Particular to education, there has been much attention paid to whether or not boys and girls are treated equally and afforded the same opportunities to succeed within and beyond the classroom. Studies have been done on issues such as the participation of girls and boys in classroom discussions, the academic achievement gap between girls and boys, the amount and quality of attention that teachers give to students in relation to gender, issues of sexual harassment in schools, and the language that teachers use to refer to boy and girl students in their classes. Stories of gender bias and discrimination against girls in schooling have emerged through this theoretical lens. Womanism. First articulated by Alice Walker, Womanism is a feminist theoretical perspective that articulates the standpoint of African American women. As a critical response to what has been perceived as mainstream feminism and women’s standpoints that present the interests and experiences largely of white women of the middle class, Womanism centers cultural feminist approaches on the lived experiences of black women. As such, issues of race, class, and gender are inextricably linked. Through this perspective, 324 teaching and learning are viewed as enacted in relation to the multiplicity of identities and experiences related to race, gender, and class. This perspective compels us to examine gender differences as interconnected with other group identities and historical contexts. It becomes impossible through a womanist lens to think about gender identities in isolation from racial and social class identities and experiences. Postmodern Feminism. Postmodern Feminism affords us the ability to look beyond binary systems of identity and difference and to explore the ways power, knowledge and meaning are flexible and co-constructed within particular locations. Understanding gender and other social categories/differences through postmodern feminist lenses allow for complex and contradictory understandings. Identities are thus positionalities – differences based on situation, language, and performance. Gender, then, can be understood as more than the simple “boy” and “girl” storylines prominently featured within Multicultural Education literature. Gender can instead be explored in connection with other salient aspects of identity and positionality. It can be seen as dynamic and necessarily context-specific. Also, gender can be seen as a verb instead of a noun – to ‘do gender’ as opposed to ‘being’ a gender. 325 What is Taught about Gender in Teacher Education? What we know about what is taught about gender within multicultural/urban teacher education can be stated succinctly in the following three statements: 1. Gender bias still exists 2. Gender can only be understood in relationship with race 3. Gender is performed within specific contexts, relationships and power relations Research related to gender issues within education, and by extension multicultural education, teacher education, and urban education, can be divided into three predominant categories that mirror the three statements above: 1. Gender bias and discrimination 2. Gender as one of multiple aspects of identity 3. Gendered power relations Below is a brief description of the literature that exists within these three categories. Gender Bias and Discrimination. The group of studies that examine on gender bias and discrimination describe the ways teacher preparation programs address, or more accurately don’t address, issues of gender. Although significant gains have been made to decrease the bias and discrimination that girls and women face within schools and society, inequalities remain. This reality underscores the need to continue research and education that focuses on gender within all levels of schooling. These studies can be grouped into three predominant areas of focus: curriculum, implications for teacher education, and teacher educator perspectives. 326 Curriculum. Two studies have been conducted regarding gender bias in teacher education textbooks. Zittleman and Sadker (2002, 2003) conducted a study that analyzed teacher education texts for gender bias. They found that the texts they focused on included only about three percent of their content on gender. Further, their results indicated that the content that does highlight gender is often inaccurate or unclear. The authors discuss how the inclusion of content related to gender has increased since a similar study conducted by Sadker and Sadker in 1980. Mader and King (1995) surveyed administrators and faculty at teacher preparation programs in Michigan to understand the incorporation of gender issues – both gender equity instruction and inclusion of feminist theories. They found that gender related instruction is lacking overall. The authors discuss the implications of the lack of inclusion of gender content in spite of studies like Sadker and Sadker’s (1980) of teacher education texts. Implications for teacher education. Several articles have been written that cite the importance of including gender issues into teacher preparation programs. Sanders (1997) gives an overview of scholarship on gender equity and teacher education. Citing all of the studies that have been done to illuminate issues of gender equity in K-12 education, including gender differences in teacher expectations, curriculum assessment, harassment, and administrative modeling, the author states that teacher education is a final step that is beginning to be taken. Pearson and Rooke (1993) argue for mainstreaming gender studies into teacher education programs. The authors note that gender and women’s studies programs have grown considerably in recent years, but in large part still have not influenced the field of 327 education. Pearson and Rooke state that incorporating gender into teacher education would not only align with, but also promote the goals of educating future teachers. These goals include developing the traits of open-mindedness and sensitivity, maintaining an inclusive liberal arts curriculum, pedagogy, and theoretical perspective. Sadker, Sadker and Klein (1991) conducted a review of research called, “The Issue of Gender in Elementary and Secondary Education.” In this piece, the authors lay out the major works of scholarship completed over decades related to gender and K-12 education. In it, they also discuss the implications for Teacher Education. They conclude that gender is rarely, if ever, included in the curriculum of teacher preparation courses, despite the large number of studies that have documented gender discrimination, bias, and disparities in academic achievement. Jones (1989) examined the influence of gender bias on teacher-student interactions with physical science and chemistry teachers. Results indicated significant bias in the amount and type of interaction teachers had with students related to gender. Implications for teacher education were discussed, and it was suggested that increased inclusion of gender related topics in preservice teacher preparation would reduce the amount of gender bias for these students as future teachers. Teacher educator perspectives. Few studies have been conducted within teacher education programs to assess gender bias and discrimination within that context. Poole and Isaacs (1993) discuss the perspectives of academic staff at an institute of higher education related to gender equity, gender issues in education, and the importance of incorporating gender into the curriculum. The results of their study indicate that teaching in an institution of higher education can maintain and reproduce existing gender 328 inequalities in education. Further, they found that messages about gender issues received by teacher education students are often complex and contradictory in nature. Gender as One of Multiple Aspects of Identity. Additionally, there has been an increasing amount of writing and research related to issues of identity that examine the intersections of gender, race, social class and many other social and cultural characteristics of students and teachers. Following in the line of many Multicultural Education theorists and practitioners, gender is also seen within Teacher Education research as one of multiple aspects of identity and diversity that need to be addressed by teachers, and thus teacher educators. There is fairly prolific writing within Multicultural Education (Nieto, Sleeter & Grant, Banks, Ladson-Billings, Gay, Gollnick, Noel, etc.) in this vein and so it was surprising to me that I have only come across a couple studies within Teacher Education that address gender in this way. This section of literature most closely relates to the theoretical perspective of Womanism. Although there are distinct differences that can be drawn, related to the discussion of the difference between Black Feminism and Womanism above, I will include this literature because it is the literature that most closely resembles an application of a Womanist perspective given very little has been written specifically employing this theoretical lens within educational research. In the article “Made in the (Multicultural) U.S.A.: Unpacking Tensions of Race, Culture, Gender, and Sexuality in Education,” Asher (2007) discusses the importance of looking at teacher education students’ multiple identities. Focusing specifically on representations of Asian Americans and differences of sexuality, the author urges teacher educators to reevaluate their incorporation, or lack thereof, of students’ critical and 329 reflective analyses of multiple identities. Asher advocates for a multicultural pedagogy that “engages the intersecting tensions of race, culture, gender, and sexuality in critical, dialogical, and self-reflective ways” (71). In “The Intersections of Race, Class, and Gender in the Teacher Preparation of an African American Social Justice Educator,” Knight (2002) conducted a case study of a working class African American female preservice teacher. Combining past research on African American teacher education and multicultural feminist literature, Knight explores the intersection of race, class, and gender within multicultural social reconstructionist teacher education. Curricular and pedagogical implications are discussed, particularly related to the concept of the intersectionality of race, gender, and class. Gendered Power Relations. Further, there has been attention paid to the ways that specific contextual factors and power relations raise important questions regarding the enactment of gender within and beyond education and schooling. The category of literature that aligns with the postmodern feminist theoretical perspective I have called “Gendered Power Relations” because the writings that I have come across in this section have incorporated a view of gender that is contextual, relational, and/or positional. Ellis (1993) wrote an interpretive account of gender through her personal reflections, analysis of her experiences as a teacher educator and an educational researcher, and psychoanalytic and poststructural theoretical perspectives. After reviewing her analysis of issues related to the symbolic work of becoming boys and girls, the significance of physicality, and the topics of aggressiveness, assertiveness, emotions, and morality, the author discusses some strategies for incorporating gender issues into 330 teacher education. Hollingsworth (1995) discusses the importance of including gender within teacher education programs. After reviewing potential hypotheses for the lack of inclusion of gender issues, and discussing different feminist frameworks for understanding and presenting issues of gender within teacher preparation, the author concludes that exploring with teacher education students their own genders and positions hold the most promise. Hollingsworth advocates for teacher educators to use feminist scholarship to help their students think critically about their own life experiences related to gender, teaching, and learning. Baker and Richardson (2005) describe a gender and education course offered to teacher education students in South Africa. In this course, narrative inquiry is used to get students to examine their own gender identities and masculine and feminine subject positionings. 331 Guiding Questions. Act 1, Scene 1: Set Up Day One. 1. How important and/or relevant do you think that this instructor’s identity characteristics are to her teaching of this course? 2. What do you think are the significance of the following: a. Addressing issues of gender in the 8th week of the course b. Dedicating one day for the topic of gender within the course c. The instructor’s use of almost one quarter of the class time on logistics d. The instructor being tired after going over the class period logistics e. That the day on gender is also the due day of a major writing assignment Act 1, Scene 2: Free Writing. Liberal Feminism (highlighted by Mary) 1. In what ways do the students’ experiences growing up reflect gender bias and discrimination? 2. The instructor mentions that she tries to call on students equally by gender. How successful do you think she is with this? Womanism (highlighted by Alice) 1. How do the experiences shared here by the students differ based on race and gender? 2. What can we learn about gender and race based on the location of the students and instructor in the classroom? 332 3. Why do you think the instructor might not share her own personal experiences in this class session? 4. How does the instructor interact with her students in ways that demonstrates shared understanding and experiences? 5. In what ways could the instructor have incorporated multiple identity characteristics into the free writing exercise? Postmodern Feminism (highlighted by Judith) 1. In what ways do students share personal experiences that transcend the traditional boy/girl binary system of gender? 2. What does the instructor mean when she talks about “doing gender”? 3. What kinds of comments from which students elicit boisterous laughter from both students and the instructor? Act 1, Scene 3: Stereotyping. Womanism (Alice) 1. Why do you think the instructor chooses the two students she does to help her write on the white board? Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 1. What do you make of the interaction around the suggestion of the term immature for boys? 2. What do you think are the benefits and/or hindrances of disclosing to students ahead of time the format that they will be invited to share what they have written? Liberal Feminism (Mary) 333 1. What are the benefits of discussing gender stereotypes? 2. Why do you think that two of the men were cupping their hands around their mouths as they shout their comments during the stereotypes activity? Act 1, Scene 4: Sex/Gender. Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 1. What are the benefits of discussing the distinctions between sex and gender? 2. Why do you think that students were quick to confuse the discussion of sex and gender with issues of sexuality and sexual orientation? 3. What are the benefits of discussing the terminology related to gender and sex with teacher candidates? Liberal Feminism (Mary) 1. What do you make of the interaction between the student who reiterated what the other student had already said? Womanism (Alice) 1. What are these students’ experiences related to sex, gender and other identity characteristics? Act 1, Scene 5: Tough Guise. Liberal Feminism (Mary) 1. What does Jackson Katz explore regarding the “Tough Guise”? 2. What factors contribute to the performance of violent masculinities? 3. What are the implications of not conforming to the “real man” persona for men? For women? 4. How familiar are you with the gendered statistics related to violent crimes? 334 Womanism (Alice) 1. In what ways are men of color distinctly impacted by the portrayal of violent masculinity? 2. How relevant are the topics raised within “Tough Guise” to students in urban schools? Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 1. What are the relationships between gender and sexuality raised in this scene? 2. How do you interpret the interactions between the instructor and students in the discussion following the viewing of the “Tough Guise” video clip? Act 2, Scene 1: Set Up Day Two. Womanism (Alice) 1. In what ways does this scene highlight the intersection of race and gender identities and experiences? Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 1. What are the meanings and impacts of casual conversation between the instructor and students at the beginning of this class period? Liberal Feminism (Mary) 1. What patterns of gendered communication do you observe in this scene? Act 2, Scene 2: Hidden: A Gender. Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 1. In what ways does joking around contribute to maintaining and/or challenging power relationships related to gender at the beginning of this scene? 2. In what ways have the images of men and women changed over time? 335 3. How do you see dating and/or sexual relationships between teachers and students as related to issues of gender and education more broadly? 4. How are masculinities and femininities performed in urban schools? Liberal Feminism (Mary) 1. When discussing violence perpetrated by men and women, what are some of the important factors to include? 2. Do you feel that men and women are equally as violent and/or portrayed that way in the media? 3. What are the benefits and/or consequences for women of taking on more masculine characteristics? Womanism (Alice) 1. How do you see the conversation between some of the students and the instructor while she sets up the video as related to the content of the class session on gender? 2. What did you learn about gender and race by watching this scene? 3. Why do you think the instructor reacted the way she did to the mention of her daughter working at McDonald’s? 4. How relevant are the instructor’s comments as a mother relevant to the course content on gender and race? 5. In what ways is urban school violence gendered? Act 2, Scene 3: Killing Us Softly 3. Liberal Feminism (Mary) 336 1. Why do you think the students in this class were so interested and engaged in watching this video clip? 2. In what ways do you think that women contribute to the perpetuation of sexism? 3. How does viewing systems of oppression as unchangeable maintain those systems? 4. Do you think that when women perform their gender and sexual identities in stereotypical ways that they are inviting oppression and/or violence? Womanism (Alice) 1. In what ways are women of color differently depicted in the media according to Jean Kilbourne? 2. In what ways do you see the instructor’s conversation at the beginning of this class session about the Ebony Fashion Fair as relevant to the discussion of the “Killing Us Softly 3” video clip? Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 1. In what ways do you see the concepts of gender, sex and sexuality being confused and/or conflated? Act 2, Scene 4: Assigned Readings. Womanism (Alice) 1. How do gender and race factor into the interactions between the instructor and her students? Postmodern Feminism (Judith) 337 1. What do you make of the side comments and/or jokes made by some of the men across these two class periods? Liberal Feminism (Mary) 1. In what ways do the students talk about issues of sexism related to their own lives? 2. Why do you think the instructor seemed surprised about the story the student shared about her experience at her service-learning placement? Additional discussion questions 1. What issues related to gender and education do you think are typically included within multicultural education? 2. What do you think are the relevant issues related to gender and education that teacher education students should be reading about? Act 2, Scene 5: Debrief. 1. What do you see as the main points raised and highlighted by each of the three women (Mary, Alice and Judith)? 2. Which of these three women do you most relate with and why? 3. Which of these three perspectives (Liberal Feminist, Womanist or Postmodern Feminist) do you feel is most valuable for these teacher education students? 338 Appendix C: Instructor Syllabus TE201: Fall 2008 Instructor: Dr. Imani Jones Email: xxxxxxxxxx Mailbox: xxxxxxxxxx Phone: xxxxxxxxxx Office Location: xxxxxxxxxx Office Hours: By appointment Course Description: This course introduces prospective teachers to the ways in which social inequality affects schooling and schooling affects social inequality. TE 201 is not a celebration of difference. Rather, this course is designed to allow students to examine how socially constructed categories (e.g., social class, race, gender, sexual orientation, disability, etc.) are used to privilege some individuals and groups and marginalize others. The course focuses mostly on one social institution, public schools in the United States; however, we will examine how other social institutions influence opportunities for success and failure in schools. Central themes of the course include culture, power, and difference. Some key questions this course will explore include:  In what ways do schools create, perpetuate, and exacerbate inequality?  How do systems of privilege impact individuals’ opportunities for social and economic mobility?  In what ways do teachers and students jointly produce conditions for successful learning or frustrating failure?  How do school-community relationships affect student opportunities to learn?  What does it mean to teach for social justice in urban environments? We will identify the ways in which teachers influence the distribution of educational and social opportunities, whether they intend to or not. This means that teachers need to understand how their pedagogy and instructional strategies affect student achievement and life opportunities. We will achieve this goal by questioning the way things are in society and challenging our assumptions, biases, and stereotypes and those of our colleagues. TE 201 is not a methods course that provides answers for successfully working in diverse classrooms. Rather, it is about how power influences schooling experiences of and opportunities for various students. This section places specific emphasis on urban environments and issues affecting urban schools. The course compares and contrasts urban schooling with schools in other demographic areas and illuminates differences among urban schools. 339 Required texts The following books can be purchased at various book stores around, including the University Store, XXXXX Store, or the XXXXX Book Store. Conchas, G. (2006). The color of success: Race and high-achieving urban youth. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Students will read ONE of the following texts. Lareau, A. (2000). Home advantage: Social class and parental intervention in elementary education. TK: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Lew, J. (2006). Asian Americans in class: Charting the achievement gap among Korean American youth. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. MacLeod, J. (1995). Ain’t no makin’ it: Aspirations and attainment in a low-income neighborhood. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Paperback. Revised Edition. Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2001). Manufacturing hope and despair: The school and kin support networks of U.S.-Mexican youth. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. A required coursepack can be purchased at XXXXX Bookstore, XXXXX). Course Evaluation Grades will be determined as follows: Attendance and Participation Thought Papers (2) Schooling/Cultural Autobiography Facilitating Book Discussion Holistic Field Inquiry  Final Paper – 15%  Narrative Analysis – 5%  Journal - 5%  Exhibition Piece – 10% 15% 30% 15% 5% 35% Attendance and Class Participation: Attendance is expected at all class sessions. Missing class can affect depth of understanding and is frequently reflected in the quality of written analysis and in the overall learning experience. I recognize that sometimes things come up that prevent students from attending class (e.g., illness, family or personal issues). However, three absences will result in an Attendance and Participation grade no higher than 2.0. Four absences will result in a zero grade for Attendance and Participation. Furthermore, you are expected to come to class on time. Two late arrivals equal one missed class. Class begins promptly at 1:00pm. As a member of this class, you are responsible for the learning that takes place during each class meeting. Your contribution to other students’ 340 learning, clarity of your contribution, and your willingness to assume responsibility for making the discussions and activities work in our learning community. For this class, high-quality participation is characterized by the following. 1. What are you learning? Students demonstrate an understanding of facts, concepts, and theories presented in the class readings and other materials. 2. How clearly do you express yourself? Students ask questions, answer questions or otherwise contribute in a comprehensible manner. 3. How do you work with others? Students offer constructive criticism during discussions and build on each other’s ideas. Students also assume leadership and maintain active participation in small groups. 4. How do you go beyond what is given? Students relate concepts from class to their experiences as a teacher and learner, generating new insights and applications. 5. How do you participate beyond the class meeting? Students provide thoughtful responses to the ANGEL online discussion forum. For this class, high-quality preparation is characterized by: 1. Submitting completed assignments on time 2. Recording notes and questions you have from the day’s readings before and during class 3. Bring the texts, readings and notes to class 4. Completing the readings and assignments in depth Online Discussion Forum Each class session, a combination of six students will be asked to post to the online discussion forum. Responders to the Day’s Material Three students will be asked to respond to the topic of the day. These students can post responses to the readings for the day, the guiding questions for the day, or class discussion and activities. These students must post their responses by 6pm on the day of the class. Posters for the Next Day’s Material Three students will be asked to post thoughts regarding the next class meeting’s material. These students can reflect on the guiding questions for the next session or post other comments and thoughts regarding the readings. If you are selected to post for a Tuesday class, you must do so by 8pm on Sunday before the class. If you are selected to post for a Thursday class, you must do so by 8pm on Wednesday before the class. When you are not chosen to post, you are strongly encouraged to take part in the discussion by responding to your classmates’ postings. Remember, participation will be assessed partly based on your contribution to the online discussion forum. 341 Thought Papers – 15%: Due Oct. 7th and Nov. 4th Students will write two thought papers (5-7 pages in length) regarding topics addressed in the course. Thought papers are reflective, critical responses to key questions posed by the Professor. These papers should demonstrate your understanding of assigned readings and should draw effectively on classroom discussions and major themes of videos and class activities. These papers should demonstrate your ability to analyze the key concepts of the course as they relate to human diversity, power, and opportunity in social institutions. Each paper will be evaluated based on the thoughtfulness of your ideas, the articulation of your argument, and the clarity of your writing. More information will follow regarding each paper. Schooling/Cultural Autobiography (Part I due Sept. 9th, Part II due Nov. 25th) : Understanding how your personal and schooling experiences have shaped your own assumptions about teaching and learning is essential to the aims of the course. During Week One, you will compose an autobiography in which you reflect on your own identity and the ways in which identity markers (such as social class, race, ethnicity, language, ability, gender, sexual orientation, etc.) informed your schooling experiences and your schooling experiences informed your identity. Your autobiography should be no more than 3-5, double-spaced pages. More information will follow. You will revisit this assignment later in the semester. Facilitating Discussion In the latter half of the semester, students will select a topic for which they will facilitate a class discussion along with other class members. This allows you to take some additional ownership in your learning process and be leaders in the classroom in a different way. You will work with your classmates to identify key ideas in the reading(s) and to develop discussion questions and/or activities that engage the class with these ideas. You should consider how you can make connections to key course themes and prior readings, as well as to students’ own schooling experiences and their service learning. Holistic Field Inquiry (Service Learning): Narrative Inquiry Due Nov. 11th; Final Paper Due Dec. 4th ; Exhibition Piece Due Dec. 8th For this section of TE201, you will be engaging in a service learning project that is distinct from other sections. Depending on your request for elementary or high school placement, students in this section will complete their service at one of the following elementary schools: XXXXX, XXXXX, XXXXX; XXXXX Middle School, or XXXXX High School. Community service learning is a way to connect academic concepts with the practices of the real world of education, and thus deepen one’s understanding of these concepts. More details about the Holistic Field Inquiry will be provided in class. Opportunities for Extra Credit: Throughout the semester, students can earn extra credit by attending or participating in community and/or cultural events and writing a two-page analysis of the event (more 342 details to follow). This event can focus on education, cultural diversity, or any TE 201 theme or concept. You will be encouraged to share your experiences with the class. Course Format and Schedule The professor and students share responsibility for fostering discussion on all topics. This course will include lectures covering weekly topics, the course texts, and supplemental materials and readings. It will also involve class discussions, group activities, projects, debates, presentations, and videos. A collaborative learning approach will be used in which students work in groups to discuss and report on ideas, issues, and concepts provided by the professor and in the course texts. The following list of questions will be helpful to keep in mind as you read each reading. • • • • • • What argument is the author(s) trying to make? What does this reading have to do with particular aspects of diversity, power, opportunity, and/or schooling? In what ways is the argument persuasive or not to you? Why? Why not? What do you think the author failed to consider about the issue? Why? Why not? Where do you agree/disagree with the author? Why? Why not? What strikes you as particularly interesting, curious, insightful, irritating, etc.? Late Assignments: Students are expected to meet writing deadlines. Any work submitted after its due date will be considered late. Late papers will be reduced by one-half letter grade for the first day of lateness and a full grade any time later, except in extreme cases. Assignments are due at the beginning of class. Writing Guidelines: Writing proficiency is a minimum requirement for satisfactory completion of this course. All written work must reflect adequate writing skills in order to receive a grade. The citation format for this course will be APA. A manual is available in the library. Please edit your work carefully and check for spelling/typographical errors before turning it in. Many of you will be teachers and you will need to be able to clearly communicate ideas to parents, other teachers, administrators, community news sources, etc. In light of this, it is our policy to support you in the development of your writing. If you feel you need outside support with writing, the Writing Center in XXXXX (tel: XXXXX; website: XXXXX) can be of assistance). I may refer you there if I feel they may be of service to you. If you already know that you have weaknesses in your writing, please see me as soon as possible, so we arrange assistance. Please do no feel embarrassed about coming to me for help – assisting you is my job as your instructor. Academic Honesty: Article XXXXX of the Academic Freedom Report states that “the student shares with the faculty the responsibility for maintaining the integrity of scholarship, grades, and professional standards.” In addition, the College of Education adheres to the policies on 343 academic honesty as specified in General Student Regulations 1.0, Protection of Scholarship and Grades, and in the all-University Policy on Integrity of Scholarship and Grades, which are included in XXXXX Life: Student Handbook and Resource Guide. Students who commit an act of academic dishonesty may receive a zero on the assignment or in the course. Special Accommodations: Students with disabilities should contact the Professor to discuss any accommodations needed to fulfill the course requirements and achieve learning objectives. In order to receive reasonable accommodations from the Professor, students must have certified eligibility through the XXXXX located at XXXXX (tel: XXXXX; TTY: XXXXX; Email: XXXXX; web: XXXXX). -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The course schedule found below is a guide and is subject to change depending on the needs of the class. W1 Tuesday, 08/26: Course Introduction • Community-Building • Review syllabus • Why study urban education? Thursday, 08/28: Why Should We Care About Educational (In)Equity? • Levin, H. (2005). The social costs of inadequate education. W2 Tuesday, 09/02: Purposes of Schooling Required Readings: • Hocschild, J., & Scovronick, N. (2003). What Americans want from public schools. • Labaree, D. (1989). The American (high) school has failed its missions. • Rothstein, R., & Jacobsen, R. (2006). The goals of education. Phi Delta Kappan, 264-272. IDENTITY, OPPORTUNITY, AND SYSTEMS OF POWER AND PRIVILEGE Thursday, 09/04: Exploring Identity and Positionality Required Readings: • Harro, B. (2000). The Cycle of Socialization. • Tatum, B. D. (2000). The Complexity of Identity: ‘Who Am I?’ W3 Tuesday, 09/09: The Social Construction of Normality and Difference 344 **SCHOOLING/CULTURAL AUTOBIOGRAPHY PART I DUE** Required Readings: • Christensen, L. (2001). Unlearning the myths that bind us: Critiquing fairy tales and films. In B. Bigelow et al (Eds.) Rethinking our classrooms: Teaching for equality and justice (pp. 8-11). Milwaukee, WI: Rethinking Schools Ltd. • Johnson, A. G. (2006). Privilege, oppression, and difference. Thursday, 09/11: Understanding Power and Privilege as Systemic Required Readings: • Johnson, A. G. (2006). Capitalism, class, and the matrix of domination. • Johnson, A. G. (2006). How systems of privilege work. • Young, I. M. (2000). Five faces of oppression. In Adams et al. (Eds.). Readings for diversity and social justice (pp. 35-49). New York: Routledge Recommended Reading: • Wildman, S. M., & Davis, A. D. (2000). Language and silence: Making systems of privilege visible. W4 Tuesday, 09/16: Disability as a Social Construct and IDEA Required Readings: • Baynton, D. C. (2001). Disability and the justification of inequality in American history. • Hewards, W., & Cavanaugh, R. (2000). Educational equality for students with disabilities. NOTE: A short version of Public Law 94-142: The Individuals with Disabilities Act can be downloaded from the Internet at http://www.casecec.org/idea/short_summary.htm Thursday, 09/18: The Interrelatedness of Race, Disabilities, and Special Education Required Readings: (Class splits chapters 9 and 10) • Harry, B., & Klinger, J. (2006). Overview: Ethnic disproportionality in special education. • Harry, B., & Klinger, J. (2006). Constructing learning disabilities: Redundancies and discrepancies. • Harry, B., & Klinger, J. (2006). Constructing behavior disorders: From troubling to troubled behavior. 345 • W5 Losen, D., & Orfield, G. (2002). Introduction: Racial inequality in special education. Tuesday, 09/23: Inclusion in Special Education Required Readings: • Belkin, L. (2004, September 12). The lessons from classroom 506. • DuCharme, C. C. (1995). Valuing differences: The children we don’t understand. • Smith, R. M., Salend, S. J., & Ryan, S. (2001). Closing or opening the special education curtain. Video: Regular Lives Thursday, 09/25: Race, Power, and Privilege Required Readings: • Nieto, S. (2003). Making choices about what terms to use. • Rosenbloom, S. R., & Way, N. (2004). Experiences of discrimination among African American, Asian American, and Latino adolescents in an urban high school. • Tatum, B. D. (2000). Defining racism: ‘Can we talk?’ W6 Tuesday, 09/30: Race, Power, and Privilege: A Focus on White Privilege Required Readings: • Edgington, A. (2000). Moving beyond White guilt. • McIntosh, P. (1989, July/August). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. • Olson, R. A. White privilege in schools. Video: Color of Fear Thursday, 10/2: Power, Privilege, and the Historical Experiences of People of Color in U.S. Schools Required Readings: • Pincus, F. L. (2000). Discrimination comes in many forms: Individual, institutional, and structural. (everyone reads) (Split amongst class) • Anderson, J. (1988). Ex-slaves and the rise of universal education in the South, 1860-1880. • Klug, B. J., and Whitfield, P. T. (2003). A Brief History of American Indian Education. 346 • • W7 Ngo, B., & Lee, S. J. (2007). Complicating the image of model minority success: A review of Southeast Asian American education. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 415-453. San Miguel Jr., G. (2003). Contested learning: Latino education in the United States from the 1500s to the present. Tuesday, 10/7: Language, Race, Ethnicity, and Culture I Required Readings: (split amongst class) • Christensen, L. (1994). Whose standard? Teaching Standard English. In B. Bigelow, L. Christensen, S. Karp, B. Milner. & B. Peterson (Eds.), Rethinking our classrooms: Teaching for equity and justice (pp. 24-28). Milwaukee: Rethinking Schools Ltd. • Delpit, L. (1994). Language diversity and learning. • Nieto, S. (2004). Linguistic diversity in U.S. classroom, pp. 209-222. • Smitherman, G. (1981). (Ed.). From Africa to the new world and into the space age. Video: Do You Speak American? Thursday, 10/9: Language, Race, Ethnicity, and Culture II – ESL and Bilingual Education Required Readings: • Artiles, Alfredo, Rueda, Robert, Salazar, Jesús José, & Higareda, Ignacio (2002). English-Language Learner Representation in Special Education in California Urban School Districts. • Cummins, J. (1996). The two faces of language proficiency. • Nieto, S. (2003). Linguistic diversity in U.S. Classrooms, pp. 222-230. Video: Lost in Translation W8 Tuesday, 10/14: Gender, Power, & Privilege **THOUGHT PAPER #1 DUE** Required Readings: • Kimmel, M. (2000). Masculinity as homophobia: Fear, shame, and silence in the construction of gender identity. • Lorber, J. (2000). ‘Night to his day’: The social construction of gender. • Sadker, D., & Sadker, M. (2001). Gender bias: From colonial America to today’s classrooms. (split sections amongst class) Video: Tough Guise 347 Thursday, 10/16: Sexual Orientation, Power, & Privilege Required Readings: • Blumenfeld, W. J. (2000). Heterosexism. • Blumenfeld, W. J. (2000). How homophobia hurts everyone. • Friend, R. A. (1998). Heterosexism, homophobia, and the culture of schooling. Video: It’s Elementary SCHOOLING, SOCIAL MOBILITY AND SOCIAL REPRODUCTION W9 Tuesday, 10/21: Social Mobility, Social Reproduction, and the Myth of Meritocracy Required Readings: • Langston, D. (2000). Tired of playing Monopoly? • MacLeod, Chapter 1 • Ransford, M. (2000). Two Hierarchies. Thursday, 10/23: Cultural Capital and Codes of Power Required Readings: • Carter, P. (2003). “Black” cultural capital, status positioning and schooling conflicts for low-income African American youth. • Delpit, L. (1995). The Silenced Dialogue. • Purcell-Gates, V. (2002). As soon as she opened her mouth! Issues of language, literacy, and power. Video: People Like Us W10 Tuesday, 10/28: Book Analyses Required Readings: • Coleman, J. and Hoeffer, T. (1987). Human capital and social capital. • Lareau • Lew • MacLeod, • Stanton-Salazar Thursday, 10/30: Book Analyses Required Readings: • Lareau • Lew • MacLeod, 348 • Stanton-Salazar, W11 Tuesday, 11/4: Book Analyses Required Readings: • Lareau • Lew • MacLeod, • Stanton-Salazar SCHOOLING AND THE URBAN CONTEXT Thursday, 11/6: Racial Segregation and the City **THOUGHT PAPER #2 DUE** Required Readings: (split amongst class) • Massey, D. S., & Denton, N. A. (1993). The construction of the ghetto. • Nocera, J. (199). How the middle class has helped ruin the public schools. • Orfield, G. (1996). The growth of segregation: African Americans, Latinos, and unequal education. • How segregated are Michigan’s schools? Changes in enrollment from 1992-1993 to 2004-2005. Available at: www.epc.msu.edu/publications/REPORT/PR27%20Segregation%20D 4%20FINAL%20Feb06%20wlogos.pdf Video: Brown video clip W12 Tuesday, 11/11: The Social Context and City Schools Required Readings: (split amongst class) • Anyon, J. (2001). Inner cities, affluent suburbs, and unequal educational opportunities. In J. Banks & C. Banks, Multicultural Education (4th edition). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Pp. 85-98. • Noguera, P. A. (2003). Conclusion: What it will take to improve America’s urban public schools. In City schools and the American dream: Reclaiming the promise of public education. New York: Teachers College Press. • Vorrasi, J. A. & Garbarino, J. (2000). Poverty and youth violence: Not all risk factors are created equal. In V. Polakow (Ed.), The public assault on America’s children. New York: Teachers College Press. • Wilson, W. J. (1996). Ghetto-Related Behavior and the Structure of Opportunity. 349 Thursday, 11/13: School Funding and City Schools **HFI NARRATIVE ANALYSIS DUE** Required Readings: • Arsen, D., & Plank, D. (2004). Michigan school finance under proposal A: State control, local consequences. • Biddle, J., & Berliner, D. (2002). Unequal school funding in the United States. • Rothstein, R. (1997). Where has all the money gone? Recommended Readings: • Miner, B. (1997). Wisconsin school funding: Robin Hood in reverse. • Noddings, N. (1997). All children deserve the best. • Sides, P. (1997). Build prisons or build schools? Video: Children in America’s Schools W13 Tuesday, 11/18: A Conceptual Framework of Urban School Success Required Readings: • Conchas, Chapters 1 & 2 • Conchas, Chapter 3-5 (split amongst students) Thursday, 11/20: Social Capital Among Urban Youth Required Readings: • Conchas, Chapters 6 W14 Tuesday, 11/25: Tracking, Detracking and School Success & Failure **SCHOOLING/CULTURAL AUTOBIOGRAPHY PART II DUE** Required Readings: (split amongst class) • Hays, E. (2002). To Track or Not to Track: That is Still a Question. In L. Darling-Hammond, J. French & S. P. Garcia-Lopez (Eds.). Learning to Teach for Social Justice (pp. 153-162). New York: Teachers College Press. • Herzman, S. (2002). Finding the Right Track. In L. DarlingHammond, J. French & S. P. Garcia-Lopez (Eds.), Learning to Teach for Social Justice (pp. 153-162). New York: Teachers College Press. • Oakes, J. (1997). Tracking: Why schools need to take another route. • Schwabe, M. (1997). The Pigs: When tracking takes its toll. Video: Brown video clip 350 Thursday, 11/27: THANKSGIVING DAY! NO CLASS!!! TEACHING FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE IN URBAN SCHOOLS W15 Tuesday, 12/2: Pedagogical and Instructional Strategies for Empowerment Required Readings: • Freire, P. (1993). Chapter 2. • Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 159-163. Thursday, 12/4: Portraits of “Good” Teaching in Urban Schools **HFI ANALYTIC PAPER DUE** Required Readings: • Corwin, M. (2000). Mama Moultrie: I touch lives. In And still we rise: The trials and triumphs of twelve gifted inner-city students. New York: Harper-Perennial. • Michie, G. (2005). Nancy Serrano. In See you when we get there: Teaching for change in urban schools (pp. 153-182). New York: Teachers College Press. Final Exam Week – Monday, 12/8: Holistic Field Inquiry Exhibition 12:45pm-3:00pm **Location To Be Announced** 351 Appendix D: Week 8 Lesson Plans Table 5: Week 8 Lesson Plans Tuesday, October 14, 2008 Topic Facilitator Logistics • Prep for book chats Time 10mins 1:00-1:10 13mins 1:10-1:23 The Social Construction of Gender Learning Social Roles: Boy/Girl Piece Materials/Notes Have students quick write on their childhood memories and experiences which helped shape the development of their gender identities 5mins to write 1. What are your earliest memories of how you learned roles for being a boy or girl? 2. What messages did the people around you (parents, teachers, friends) pass on to you about being a girl or boy? 3. How did these messages affect how you thought about yourself? 8mins pair and share Discuss Readings Ask students to point out author’s main arguments. Take questions, comments, and reactions to readings. Lead a discussion around them. Use the guiding questions to the right. 15mins 1:23-1:38 Posters focused on Kimmel and Lorber 352 1. Identify three ways in which you can promote anti-sexist practices in your future classroom. 2. What connections can you make between the social construction of gender, normality and privilege? 3. Give three examples of how teachers can supplement Table 5 (cont’d) textbooks to Identify three ways in which you can promote anti-sexist practices in your future classroom. 4. What connections can you make between the social construction of gender, normality and privilege? 5. Give three examples of how teachers can supplement textbooks to eliminate the seven forms of gender bias identified in Sadker & Sadker. 6. In what ways do Mrs. Howe's interactions with the boys and girls during the music lesson indicate gender bias? How might you help Mrs. Howe change her behavior and make it more gender-fair? Tough Guise Wrap Up Responders for Today Tonya, Bethany, Monica 5mins 2:15-2:20 Posters for Thursday Christopher, Rachel, Jane 353 Table 5 (cont’d) Thursday, October 16, 2008 Topic Facilitator Logistics Time 10mins 1:00-1:10 15mins 1:05-1:20 Springboards for discussing Sexism Have the students divide up into groups of males and females. Males focus on Q12 & Q15. Females focus on Q13 & Q14. Materials Make connections back to normality, privilege. Also try to make connections to implications for boys and girls in schools 8mins in pair & share 7mins for large group discussion Early Learnings Do a concept map of the terms that come up when you think of the word gay or lesbian 10mins 1. Have students work in 1:20:1:30 groups of 3 then report back. What is the first time that you remember knowing that there was a sexual orientation other than heterosexual? What do you remember learning about gay/lesbian or bisexual people, and from what source did you learn this information? How did you learn that you were expected to be heterosexual? Readings Blumenfeld, Friend, & Kimmel 15mins 1:30-1:45 354 Table 5 (cont’d) It’s Elementary 30mins 1:45-2:15 Wrap Up Posters for Tues: Lily, Terrance, Peter Responders for Today: Aisha, Cheryl, Rasheena 355 Appendix E: Online Posting Prompts Week 8 “Gender, Power, and Privilege”. 1. What is homophobia, and how is it oppressive? 2. Identify three ways in which you can promote anti-sexist practices in your own classroom. 3. What connections can you make between the social construction of gender, normality and privilege? 4. Give three examples of how teachers can supplement textbooks to eliminate the seven forms of gender bias identified in Sadker & Sadker. 5. In what ways do Mrs. Howe's interactions with the boys and girls during the music lesson indicate gender bias? How might you help Mrs. Howe change her behavior and make it more gender-fair? 356 Appendix F: Who Was Called On, Instructor Response and Response Type Table Table 6: Who Was Called On, Instructor Response and Response Type Who was Called on: Jane Ashleee Peter Terrance Tonya Rhonda Rasheena Bethany Nikki Nikki Summer Terrance Maria Marcus Aisha Laura Rasheena Terrance Summer Marcus Peter Cheryl Nikki Bethany Rasheena Rhonda Terrance Cheryl Laura Jane Monica Christopher Ashleee Cheryl Student Spoke: 27 sec 20 sec 30 sec 20 sec 16 sec 11 sec 19 sec 23 sec 23 sec 13 sec 36 sec 15 sec 15 sec 57 sec 15 sec 44 sec 23 sec 7 sec 44 sec 14 sec 24 sec 27 sec 10 sec 27 sec 18 sec 15 sec 8 sec 28 sec 6 sec 17 sec 44 sec 32 sec 27 sec 33 sec Instructor Response: 1 sec 3 sec 3 sec 4 sec 5 sec 24 sec 4 sec 4 sec 7 sec 14 sec 1 sec 5 sec 2 sec 15 sec 1 sec 20 sec 42 sec 21 sec 6 sec 17 sec 7 sec 2 sec 20 sec 1 min 24 sec 3 sec 2 sec 54 sec 1 sec 10 sec 9 sec 1 min 15 sec 1 min 22 sec 5 sec 58 sec 357 Comment Type: A, O, E A, G, B, O A, O, L, G A, B, O, M A, T, L A, B, T, O A, S, C, O, G A, L, C, O, E A, O, C, T, G A, C, G, S, O A, O, G, E A, E, C, O, G, T A, C, O A, C, L, O, G, B A, O, C, G A, O, R, C, B, T, G A, G, I, X, R, L, C A, G, L, B, E, T A, C, G, O X, B A, O, E, D A, O, G, S A, T A, O, G, B, E, R, C, T, X A, R, S A, S I, S, X, B A, O, C A, O, G, X, T A, O, C, R, B, S A, O, C, G, T, B, X, S A, O, G, C, X, S A, O, C, R, G A, O, G, R, C, E, X Table 6 (cont’d) Rhonda Rasheena Monica Peter Timothy Cheryl Laura Aisha Summer Marcus Jane Bethany Nikki Rachel 25 sec 27 sec 27 sec 27 sec 13 sec 54 sec 24 sec 45 sec 31 sec 17 sec 27 sec 24 sec 10 sec 36 sec 27sec 6 sec 2 sec 18 sec 1 sec 4 sec 1 min 2 sec 2 sec 4 sec 28 sec 37 sec 40 sec 2 sec 1 min 16 sec A, O, G, R, T I, R, A, O, G, S A, O, G A, O, G, C, R, X A, O, G A, O, G, C, E A, O, C, S, X, G, R, B A, O, R, G A, O, E O, G, C, X A, O, B, X A, O, G, E, X, L, T A, O, G A, O, L, I, X, E, B Comment Types Key. 1. (A) Acknowledgement - comment that acknowledges the student (ok, mmm hmm, etc.) 2. (G) Agreement - comment that agrees with the student (sure, yes, uh huh, right, etc.) 3. (R) Restatement - paraphrased or exact restatement of student comment 4. (E) Evaluation - comment that places a value on a student’s comment (good, interesting, exactly, etc.) 5. (I) Interrogation - comment that challenges, questions, or corrects a student’s comment 6. (B) Bridge - comment that connects student comment to another student comment and/or course content 7. (T) Transition - comment that wraps up an entire section of discussion/comments 8. (S) Solicitation - comment that seeks additional students’ comments/input 9. (O) Overlap - comment that is spoken along with students’ comments, simultaneously or intermittently 10. (M) Management - comment that is made to the class during students’ sharing for classroom management purposes (shhh, etc.) 11. (L) Laughter - instructor laughter during or following students’ comments 12. (C) Conclusion - comment that extends or finishes a students’ idea 13. (X) Explanation - comment that answers a student question or explains an idea 14. (D) Direction - comment that directs a student to do something (bring in article, etc.) 358 Appendix F: Time Speaking and Instructor Response Table Table 7: Time Speaking and Instructor Response Students 10/14 & 10/16 Time Speaking Black Women (40.82 %) 8 min 39 sec Latina Woman (2.04 %) 15 sec White Women (36.73 %) 6 min 17 sec Total Women (79.59 %) 15 min 11 sec Black Men (12.24 %) White Men (8.16 %) Total Men (20.41 %) Total ALL (100 %) % Total Time Response 44.17 % 6 min 17 sec 1.28 % 2 sec 32.09 % 4 min 46 sec 77.53 % 11 min 5 sec 2 min 50 sec 14.47 % 1 min 34 sec 8% 4 min 24 sec 22.47 % 19 min 35 sec 359 100 % % Total 40.98 % 0.22 % 31.09 % 72.28 % 3 min 46 sec 24.57 % 29 sec 3.15 % 4 min 15 sec 27.72 % 15 min 20 sec 100 % Appendix H: Hands Raised, Called On, and Speaking Instances Table Table 8: Hands Raised, Called On, and Speaking Instances Student Karla Raised Hand 0 (abs 2) Called On 0 (abs 2) Spoke 0 (abs 2) Jane 5 3 4 Tonya 8 1 4 Bethany 5 3 3 Nikki 9 4 10 Monica 8 2 3 Lily 2 0 0 Terrance 8 4 12 Peter 3 3 10 Aisha 8 2 7 Cheryl 26 4 4 Rasheena 9 4 12 Cristina 0 0 0 Marcus 10 3 15 Laura 4 3 6 Ashlee 3 2 3 Timothy 1 1 10 Stacey 0 0 1 Summer 4 3 3 Rhonda 8 3 6 Sarah 0 0 0 Chelsea 0 0 0 Kelli 1 0 0 Maria 2 (abs 1) 1 (abs 1) 1 (abs 1) Christopher 1 1 1 Rachel 2 1 1 127 48 116 Total: 360 Appendix I: Peer Conversation Pairs Tonya & Rasheena Aisha & Cheryl Monica & Kelli Ashlee & Timothy Terrance & Summer Christopher & Jane Maria & Sarah Bethany & Marcus Peter & Laura Rhonda & Rachel Lily, Stacey & Chelsea Cristina & Nikki 361 REFERENCES 362 REFERENCES Adams, N. G. (1997). Feminist poststructuralism and the possibilities of theory in transforming middle level teacher education programs. Teacher Education Quarterly, 24(4), 117-128. American Association of University Women. (1998). Gender gaps: Where schools still fail our children. Washington, DC: AAUW American Association of University Women (1992). How schools shortchange girls. Washington, DC: AAUW. Asher, N. (2007). Made in the (multicultural) U.S.A.: Unpacking tensions of race, culture, gender, and sexuality in education. Educational Researcher, 36, 65–73. Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. G. (2004). Handbook of research on multicultural education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. G. (2005). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. Baker, M. & Richardson, E.M. (2005). Making gender matter: the inclusion of gender studies in teacher education. Presented at SAADA Conference, Durban (2005). Boyle-Baise, M. (1999). Bleeding boundaries or uncertain center? A historical exploration of multicultural education. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 14(3), 191-215. Britzman, Deborah (2000). The question of belief: Writing poststructural ethnography. In E. St. Pierre & W. Pillow (Eds.), Working the ruins: Feminist poststructural theory and methods in education (pp 27-40). New York: Routledge. Butler, J. (1999). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY: Routledge. Cazden, C. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Davies, B. (1989). The discursive production of the male/female dualism in school setting. Oxford Review of Education, 15(3), 229-241. Davies, B. (2000). Eclipsing the constitutive power of discourse. In E. A. St. Pierre & W. S. Pillow (Eds.), Working the ruins: Feminist poststructural theory and methods in education (pp. 179-198). New York: Routledge. 363 Ellis, J. (1993). ‘If I were a boy…’: Constructing knowledge about gender issues in teacher education. Curriculum Inquiry, 23(4), 367-393. Erickson, F. (2006). Definition and analysis of data from videotape: Some research procedures and their rationales. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli, & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp. 177-205). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Friedan, B. (1963). The feminine mystique. London: Penguin, 1993. Gollnick, D. M., & Chinn, P. C. (2002). Multicultural education in a pluralistic society. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Merrill. Hill-Collins, P. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge. Hill-Collins, P. (1996). What's in a name? Womanism, Black feminism, and beyond. Black Scholar, 26(1), 9-17. Hollingsworth, S. (1995). The "problem" of gender in teacher education. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 8(2), 3-11. hooks, b. (1989). Talking back: Thinking feminist, thinking black. Boston: South End Press. Jones, M. G. (1989). Gender issues in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education. 40(1), 33-38. Kirsh, G. (1999). Ethical dilemmas in feminist research. Albany: SUNY. Knight, M.G. (2002). The intersections of race, class and gender in the teacher preparation of an African American social justice educator. Equity and Excellence in Educaiton, 35(3), 212-224. Lather, P. (1992). Critical frames in educational research: Feminist and post-structural perspectives. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 87-99. Mader, C.E. & King, C.M. (1995). Awareness of gender within teacher education programs, paper presented at the American Educational Research Association. San Francisco, California, 18 April 1995. Nieto, S. (2004). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. Boston, Mass: Allyn and Bacon. 364 Pearson, A.T. & Rooke, P.T. (1993). Gender studies and teacher education: A proposal. Canadian Journal of Education, 18(4), 414-428. Phillips, L. (2006). The Womanist reader. ed. Layli Phillips. New York: Taylor & Francis Group. Poole & Isaacs (1993). The gender agenda in teacher education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 14(3), 275-284. Sadker, D. & Sadker, M. (1980). Failing at fairness: How America's schools cheat girls. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company. Sadker, M., Sadker, D., & Klein, S. (1991). The issue of gender in elementary and secondary education. In G. Grant (Ed.), Review of Research in Education, 17, 269–234. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. Sanders, J. (1997). Teacher education and gender equity. ERIC digest, ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education Washington DC. ERIC Identifier: ED408277. [Online] www.ericfacility.net/databases/ ERIC_Digests/ed408277.html. Date Accessed: 10/26/2008. Scott, J.W. (1992). The evidence of experience. Critical Inquiry, 17(4), 773-797. Segall, A. (2002). Disturbing practice: Reading teacher education as text. New York: Peter Lang. Sleeter, C. E., & Grant, C. A. (2003). Making choices for multicultural education: Five approaches to race, class, and gender. New York: J. Wiley & Sons. St. Pierre, E. A. (2000). Poststructural feminism in education: An overview. Qualitative studies in education, 13(5), 477-515. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. California: Sage Publications. Thorne, B. (1997). Gender play: Girls and boys in school, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, and Buckingham, England: Open University Press, 1993. Tong, R. (1989). Feminist thought: A comprehensive introduction. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Tong, R. (1998). Feminist thought: A more comprehensive introduction. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Tyler, S. (1986). Post-modern ethnography: From document of the occult to the occult document. In J. Clifford & G. Marcus (Eds.), Writing culture: The poetics and 365 politics of ethnography (pp. 122-140). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Walker, Alice. 1990. "Definition of Womanist," In G. Anzaldua (ed.), Making Face, Making Soul: Haciendo Caras. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books, 370. Wallin, D.C. (2001). Postmodern Feminism and educational policy development. McGill Journal of Education, 36(1), 27-43. Weedon, C. (1997). Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. West, C. & Zimmerman, D.H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender and Society, 1, 125-151. Wollstonecraft, M. (1792). A vindication of the rights of woman: with strictures on moral and political subjects. Thomas and Andrews. Zittleman, K., & Sadker, D. (2002). Gender bias in teacher education texts: New (and old) lessons. Journal of Teacher Education. 53(2), 168-80. Zittleman, K. & Sadker, D. (2003). The unfinished gender revolution. Educational Leadership. 60(4), 59-63. 366