Educational Psychology—Limitations and Possibilities

684 The Praeger Handbook of Education and Psychology
Socially constructed or not, many women develop intellectually through the process. Educators
may find the work of Belenky helpful as a tool in the pedagogical processes. If as educators,
we develop an understanding of how these women become constructed knowers, we can better
tailor our pedagogical methods toward enhancing development of women as well as men to this
epistemological stage. At the same time we can encourage women and men to develop a strong
sense of self and move through these stages more deliberately at a much earlier age. The goal
here is to create students who recognize the contributions of all individuals in the process of
intellectual development.
REFRAMING THE GENDER MESSAGE
Margaret Mead defined an ideal culture, as one in which there was a place for every human gift.
This ideal culture would allow its members to grow to their fullest potentials, and would allow the
culture the maximum use of its members’ gifts. Nothing would be wasted. Socially constructed
differences between masculinity and femininity exist. Unfortunately, along with recognition of
the differences often comes the assignment of social value to those differences. In a pedagogical
environment it is important to tailor learning strategies to these differences but it is equally
important to use this environment to deconstruct the hierarchal value placed on these gender
differences. Amy Guttman speaks of the need for a democratic dialogue in the classroom in order
to experience true understanding of these differences. She focuses on dialogue as an avenue to
explore cultural, religious, and gender differences. Dialogue also serves as a curricular strategy
that demands the rethinking of limitations placed on cognitive capabilities based on gender.
Guttman believes that schools have a responsibility to get students ready for citizenship and that
public school must be at the center of the debate. Guttman proposes the need to keep the push
toward improving self-esteem and mutual respect regardless of gender, in balance. She does not
suggest that dialogue will end all of society’s problems with gender inequality but it will teach
students about their shared citizenship and their shared humanity with all individuals, regardless
of citizenship (Guttman, 1996). This conversation gives students the opportunity to have direct
experience with who the other is, affording them countless opportunities of the practice of daily
democracy.
By encouraging classroom dialogue about difference whether it is race, class, or genders
in the school, students are provided with a more solid ground for decision making and value
clarification. Students are moved more quickly to the position of a constructed knower regardless
of their gender. Individuals must be taught to share mutual respect. This does not mean that
all bias will be purged from the educational system nor does it mean that everyone will agree
with or accept those differences, but it does mean that there will be an ongoing dialogue that
encourages the mutual respect among people. In order for this dialogue to be effective it needs to
be framed in such a way as to allow everyone the opportunity to have an equally valued speech,
free from the limitations of gender roles. By continuing this dialogue there may eventually be a
time when women no longer feel the need to “perform femininity.” Once the voices of women in
the classroom began to be heard, we begin the reconstruction of access to learning. All students
learn how to voice one’s opinion free of trivialization or invalidation as a result of one’s gender.
This in turn leads to varied positions of authority or expertise in the classroom. Students become
repositioned as producers and interrogators of knowledge. In the mean time, it is important
for educators to recognize how the social construction of gender as well as the performance
of that gender contributes to the way students learn, apply, and produce knowledge, and how
traditional conceptions of educational psychology has in the past classified gendered ways of
knowing that result in counterproductive learning experiences for both female and male students.
And of equal importance is the need for educators to recognize their own positionality within