As earlier noted, <strong>the</strong>re are certainly notable exceptions to this, particularly asevidenced by <strong>the</strong>matic working groups such as ATHENA3’s ICT in Women’sStudies whose efforts are noteworthy in promoting feminist research andtechnological/e-learning best practices <strong>with</strong>in and outside <strong>the</strong> classroom. YetI would argue that despite <strong>the</strong> significant efforts on <strong>the</strong> part of ATHENA3’sICT working group, <strong>third</strong> <strong>wave</strong> <strong>feminists</strong>’ pedagogic and ICT training remainsa patch-work of practices, pieced toge<strong>the</strong>r through <strong>the</strong>ir experiences teachingalongside senior level faculty as apprentice instructors and via informal, albeitproductive conversations <strong>with</strong> graduate and junior level faculty colleagues abouthow best to cultivate an interdisciplinary, feminist classroom space that utilizestechnology in creative and innovative ways. So while <strong>the</strong>matically boundedworking groups like ATHENA3’s ICT in Women’s Studies prove invaluablein strategizing how to incorporate ICTs into feminist classrooms spaces and intransferring knowledge across national and institutional borders, <strong>the</strong>re appearsto be an additional need to institutionalize such insights into <strong>the</strong> advanceddegree training and professional development of <strong>third</strong> <strong>wave</strong> feminist scholars at<strong>the</strong>ir respective institutions during and after <strong>the</strong>ir postgraduate studies.In addition to creating more formalized sites for <strong>third</strong> <strong>wave</strong> <strong>feminists</strong>to discuss and exchange ideas about pedagogy, <strong>the</strong>re is likewise a need to maphow <strong>the</strong>y are teaching gender and using ICT in <strong>the</strong> classroom and whe<strong>the</strong>rsuch efforts efficaciously bridge exigent gaps between curricular content andpedagogic practice. Here Gill Kirkup’s observation is noteworthy. She states:“It is sad but true that feminist pedagogy, Women’s Studies and Gender Studieshas produced radical and influential content, but <strong>the</strong>ir pedagogic practiceshave become restrictive and unadventurous, particularly <strong>with</strong> respect to mediause.” 6 Chief among my interests is gauging whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>third</strong> <strong>wave</strong> <strong>feminists</strong> havecontinued <strong>the</strong> “restrictive and unadventurous” pedagogic practices that Kirkupalludes to or whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>y, like members of ATHENA3’s ICT working group,are instead re-vamping and successfully merging <strong>the</strong>oretical content <strong>with</strong>innovative technology and media use in feminist classrooms.Deconstructing and productively harnessing <strong>the</strong> tensions betweencurriculum and pedagogy seems of particular importance for <strong>third</strong> <strong>wave</strong> <strong>feminists</strong>,specifically those disciplined and institutionalized in Women’s and Gender Studiesprograms since <strong>the</strong>y have inherited thirty plus years of politicized, transformative,and discipline-bending intellectual work alongside university settings increasingly6Gill Kirkup, 27-28.100
esieged by neoliberal values where heightened technological mediation of <strong>the</strong>classroom can and often does fall under <strong>the</strong> auspices of cutting instruction costs.Although most <strong>third</strong> <strong>wave</strong> <strong>feminists</strong> remain keenly aware of <strong>the</strong>ir historical locationenmeshed in <strong>the</strong> throes of a techno-cultural landscape characterized by“informatic domination,” densely knit webs of human/non-human relations andpower, and <strong>the</strong> hyper-mediation and visual domination of social space, relations,and meaning, <strong>the</strong>y are tasked in similar though decidedly distinct ways from<strong>the</strong>ir second <strong>wave</strong> mentors <strong>with</strong> negotiating how to translate such analytic insightsinto <strong>the</strong>ir pedagogic and classroom practices while remaining relevant tostudents’ lives and fluent in utilizing existing and <strong>new</strong> classroom technologies. 7Here <strong>third</strong> <strong>wave</strong> <strong>feminists</strong> are challenged to build upon <strong>the</strong> treasure-trove ofexcellent feminist research on pedagogy by asking whe<strong>the</strong>r historically identifiedfeminist pedagogical aims – to empower students, to bridge gaps between studentexperience and feminist knowledge production, to function as <strong>the</strong> academicor at <strong>the</strong> very least, <strong>the</strong> archival arm of <strong>the</strong> women’s and feminist movements –are tenable despite or perhaps in light of technology. 8 Can <strong>third</strong> <strong>wave</strong> <strong>feminists</strong>teach <strong>with</strong> and produce our own ICT content in ways that challenge ra<strong>the</strong>r thanprivilege our students’ all-too common role as passive, consuming subjects? Wemay fur<strong>the</strong>r consider what kind of media and technology support and/or delimitour classroom goals and in what ways <strong>new</strong> media and technology have redefined<strong>the</strong> ways we interact <strong>with</strong> students and vice versa. These questions are certainlynot exhaustive; ra<strong>the</strong>r, <strong>the</strong>y are meant to serve as a productive launch pad inthinking about how and under what circumstances <strong>third</strong> <strong>wave</strong> <strong>feminists</strong> striveto teach gender <strong>with</strong> and alongside <strong>the</strong>se burgeoning technologies and media.What remains to be seen, however, are how we use <strong>the</strong>m and whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>y fulfilour underlying pedagogic goals, however shifting, non-unitary, and provisionalsuch goals may be.Though <strong>the</strong>re are many <strong>new</strong> e-learning and virtual learning environments,a few techno-media sites/programs stand out and have helped to reconstitutestudent-instructor interactions. They include: Microsoft PowerPoint presentations,You Tube, blogs, Wiki, social networking sites like Facebook, and virtuallearning environments like Moodle. While PowerPoint presentations are not7Rosi Braidotti, Transpositions (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2006); 48, 57; Donna Haraway, Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium. FemaleMan©_Meets_OncoMouse. (London and New York: Routledge, 1997):174.8For a useful discussion of <strong>the</strong>se topics, see Nancy A. Naples and Karen Bohar, <strong>Teaching</strong> Feminist Activism: Strategiesfrom <strong>the</strong> Field (New York and London: Routledge, 2002); Robyn Wiegman, Women’s Studies On Its Own: A NextWave Reader in Institutional Change (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2002).101
- Page 1:
Teaching with the Third WaveNew Fem
- Page 4 and 5:
© Åse Bengtsson and Catti Brandel
- Page 6 and 7:
“This Is Not Therapy!” 75Un/Exp
- Page 9 and 10:
PrefaceThe idea of writing this boo
- Page 11 and 12:
IntroductionDaniela Gronold, Brigit
- Page 13 and 14:
Brandelius who is portrayed on the
- Page 15 and 16:
The institutional context of Women
- Page 17:
The chapters present new feminist e
- Page 20 and 21:
IntroductionSecond-wave feminism is
- Page 22 and 23:
Second-Wave Feminist Generationalit
- Page 24 and 25:
and conflictual ones), and since th
- Page 26 and 27:
This allows her to conceptualize a
- Page 28 and 29:
The Anglo-American and the French t
- Page 30 and 31:
To traverse the classifications of
- Page 32 and 33:
ing system without a General and wi
- Page 34 and 35:
Let me end this chapter by providin
- Page 36 and 37:
Buikema tells the story of Sarah Ba
- Page 38 and 39:
Roof, Judith. “Generational Diffi
- Page 40 and 41:
postmodern capitalism and the impli
- Page 42 and 43:
European scope and its neoliberal c
- Page 44 and 45:
front. A strong motivation offered
- Page 46 and 47:
In her editorial response to Hemmin
- Page 48 and 49:
Gender Studies’, 28 I agree with
- Page 50 and 51:
expected to play a central role as
- Page 52 and 53: Implications for teaching gender: d
- Page 54 and 55: These re- appropriations cannot be
- Page 56 and 57: Puig de la Bellacasa, Maria. “Fle
- Page 58 and 59: We are both white scholars who grew
- Page 60 and 61: mapped in the first part of project
- Page 62 and 63: able much earlier; therefore the pe
- Page 64 and 65: Using the example of Germany Wollra
- Page 66 and 67: of a link to already existing stere
- Page 68 and 69: The alien’s green colour tells of
- Page 70 and 71: Implications of teaching Critical W
- Page 72 and 73: ness to people with different backg
- Page 74 and 75: theories. This concept can be fruit
- Page 76 and 77: Räthzel, Nora. “Nationalism and
- Page 78 and 79: nism’ in the classroom. Thus, whi
- Page 80 and 81: As a method, memory work focuses on
- Page 82 and 83: ence on the teaching. This was beca
- Page 84 and 85: when we wanted them to do memory wo
- Page 86 and 87: in the consciousness-raising groups
- Page 88 and 89: as a therapeutic method, they not o
- Page 90 and 91: “Empowerment has, however, someti
- Page 92 and 93: fascination with the strong commona
- Page 94 and 95: practice”. 43 She explains MacKin
- Page 96 and 97: has been exposed to subjection by o
- Page 98 and 99: Sebastien, Amanda. “Tendencies in
- Page 100 and 101: a historical moment when technologi
- Page 104 and 105: new per se, they like Internet-base
- Page 106 and 107: where technological and media accou
- Page 108 and 109: to avoid binaristic traps, rejectin
- Page 110 and 111: ReferencesBraidotti, Rosi. Metamorp
- Page 112 and 113: IntroductionIn 2007, with two other
- Page 114 and 115: WoMen at workIn all, it took us alm
- Page 116 and 117: Facing Uncertainties and Self-quest
- Page 118 and 119: Doctorate degree’s curricula for
- Page 120 and 121: In addition, many feminist academic
- Page 122 and 123: and duties which are seen as comple
- Page 124 and 125: answers adapted to their own profes
- Page 126 and 127: As the form of the message counts a
- Page 128 and 129: ReferencesBlanchard, Soline, Jules
- Page 130 and 131: As the learning outcomes demonstrat
- Page 132 and 133: Within the organizational structure
- Page 134 and 135: Gender-sensitive didactics can be p
- Page 136 and 137: A further dimension is knowledge ab
- Page 138 and 139: Teaching materialsSince language is
- Page 140 and 141: and absences, both short term and p
- Page 142 and 143: The cliché cloakroomSometimes it w
- Page 144 and 145: and goatees, later almost all wante
- Page 146 and 147: Presentations from the working grou
- Page 148 and 149: ConclusionTeachers’ self-reflecti
- Page 150 and 151: Mühlen Achs, Gitta. Geschlecht bew
- Page 152:
Milka Metso, PhD Candidate, Univers