Abstract
In this article I discuss how observed discourses of resistance indicate the exclusion of the standpoint of primary school practitioners from feminist theorization, as well as the exclusion of feminist perspectives from primary school practice. I do so from a feminist position which sees the modernist policy framework of the gender-inclusive curriculum as still having transformative potential in the postmodern era, whilst also perceiving the need for much more specific analysis of the varied discourses of resistance. The data is selected from a wider longitudinal case study that investigated the conceptualization and enactment of a gender-inclusive curriculum policy in the state of Victoria in Australia since 1975. I focus this discussion on interviewed “exemplars” who observed primary practitioner resistance to gender inclusive curriculum policy. I conclude that this case study empirically demonstrates the failure of “backlash” in accounting for the significant specificities of primary practitioner discourses of resistance.
Thanks are due to the helpful comments offered by the reviewers of this article.
Notes
1. I take “transformation” to mean enabling curriculum reform of mainstream primary practice and I argue that this should constitute an improvement from a feminist perspective (Collins, Citation2000b; Johnson, Citation2001b, Citation2002f).
2. I agree with Cornell (Citation1995) that poststructural theorists would reject the periodization that I employ in taking the described stance.
3. Some recent work in academe seems to have particular potential for linking with the primary teaching profession (see, for instance, Beckett, Citation2001; Foster, Kimmel & Skelton, Citation2001; Gill & Starr, Citation2000; Haywood & Mac an Ghaill, Citation2001a, Citation2001b; Johnson, Citation2002d; Kenway et al., Citation1998; Martino, Citation2001; Martino & Meyenn, Citation2001; Meyenn & Parker, Citation2001). In addition, there is incisive critique of “backlash” in academe, but the limited scope of this article does not permit engagement with these ideas here. Very briefly, backlash explanations are aptly criticized as eurocentric, limited to the formal legislative sphere, and effectively seeking to dilute feminist debates within academe (see, for example, Lingard & Douglas, Citation1999; McLeod Citation1998a).
4. This perspective is located in wider support for the “practitioner research movement” (see, for example, Day, Citation2000; Fullan, Citation1993; Grundy, Robison, & Tomazos, Citation2001; Johnson, Citation1999, Citation2002b; McTaggart, Henry & Johnson, Citation1997).
5. It is relevant to note that I was surprised to uncover this degree of primary teacher resistance through this study. Indeed, the intent behind the wider study was to explore gender-inclusive exemplars. I did not set out to document “the losses of the left” as expressed so eloquently by Brown (Citation2000).
6. The term “senior” here is used to refer to occupational hierarchy, as opposed to chronological years.
7. Curriculum development and planning in Victoria—Ministerial paper number six (Ministry of Education and Training Victoria, Citation1984) is the illustrative policy document of the day. It establishes this view of policy as shared discourse. Working for gender justice in schools (Ministry of Education and Training Victoria, Citation1991) stands out as an interesting exception and for elaboration on this policy material see Johnson (Citation2002f). For broader analysis of the policy literature at the state and federal levels see Johnson (Citation2002a) and for an overview see Johnson (Citation1998a, Citation1998b, Citation2002e).
Collins
,
C.
,
×
,
J.
and
McLeod
,
J.
2000b
.
Gender debates we still have to have
.
Australian Educational Researcher
,
27
:
37
–
48
.
Johnson
,
E.
(2001b)
“We really started coming up with a final product”: Primary practitioners’ perceptions of gender inclusive curriculum
. Paper presented at the Biennial Conference of the Association of Curriculum Studies in Australia ,
Australian National University
,
October
.
Johnson
,
E.
2002f
.
“They don't associate it with feminism”: In-service educators’ conceptions of the gender inclusive curriculum
.
Journal of In-service Education
,
29
:
31
–
47
.
Cornell
,
D.
1995
.
“
Rethinking the time of feminism
”
. In
Feminist contentions: A philosophical exchange
,
Edited by:
Cornell
,
D.
and
Fraser
,
L.
New York
:
Routledge
.
Beckett
,
L.
2001
.
“
Challenging boys: addressing issues of masculinity within a gender equity framework
”
. In
What about the boys? Issues of masculinity in schools
,
Edited by:
Martino
,
W.
and
Meyenn
,
B.
66
–
81
.
Buckingham
:
Open University Press
.
Foster
,
V.
,
Kimmel
,
M.
and
Skelton
,
C.
2001
.
“What about the boys?” An overview of the debates
”
. In
What about the boys? Issues of masculinity in schools
,
Edited by:
Martino
,
W.
and
Meyenn
,
B.
1
–
23
.
Buckingham
:
Open University Press
.
Gill
,
J.
and
Starr
,
K.
2000
.
Sauce for the goose? Deconstructing the boys-in-education push
.
Discourse
,
21
:
323
–
334
.
Haywood
,
C.
and
Mac An Ghaill
,
M.
2001a
.
“
The significance of teaching English boys: Exploring social change, modern schooling and the making of masculinities
”
. In
What about the boys? Issues of masculinity in schools
,
Edited by:
Martino
,
W.
and
Meyenn
,
B.
24
–
37
.
Buckingham
:
Open University Press
.
Haywood
,
C.
and
Mac An Ghaill
,
M.
2001b
.
What about the boys?” Re-gendered local labour markets and the recomposition of working class masculinities
.
British Journal of Education and Work
,
9
:
19
–
30
.
Johnson
,
E.
(2002d)
.
Lessons for 2003 from 1993: Primary teacher standpoint on policy backlash against the gender inclusive curriculum
. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education ,
University of Queensland
,
December
.
Kenway
,
J.
,
Willis
,
S.
,
Blackmore
,
J.
and
Rennie
,
L.
1998
.
Answering back: girls, boys and feminism in schools
,
Sydney
:
Allen & Unwin
.
Martino
,
W.
2001
.
“Powerful people aren't usually real, kind, friendly, open people!” Boys interrogating masculinities at school
”
. In
What about the boys? Issues of masculinity in schools
,
Edited by:
Martino
,
W.
and
Meyenn
,
B.
82
–
95
.
Buckingham
:
Open University Press
.
Martino
,
W.
and
Meyenn
,
B.
2001
.
What about the boys? Issues of masculinity in schools
,
Buckingham
:
Open University Press
.
Meyenn
,
B.
and
Parker
,
J.
2001
.
“
Naughty boys at school: Perspectives on boys and discipline
”
. In
What about the boys? Issues of masculinity in schools
,
Edited by:
Martino
,
W.
and
Meyenn
,
B.
169
–
185
.
Buckingham
:
Open University Press
.
Lingard
,
B.
and
Douglas
,
P.
1999
.
Men engaging feminisms: Pro feminism, backlashes and schooling
,
Buckingham
:
Open University Press
.
McLeod
,
J.
1998a
.
Out of the comfort zone; feminism after the backlash
.
Discourse
,
19
:
371
–
378
.
Day
,
C.
2000
.
Effective leadership and reflective practice
.
Reflective Practice
,
1
:
113
–
127
.
Fullan
,
M.
1993
.
Change forces—Probing the depths of educational reform
,
London
:
Falmer Press
.
Grundy
,
S.
,
Robison
,
J.
and
Tomazos
,
D.
2001
.
Interrupting the way things are: Exploring new directions in school/university partnerships
.
South Pacific Journal of Teacher Education
,
29
(
3
)
:
203
–
218
.
Johnson
,
E.
1999
.
Mapping learning communities
.
Australian Educational Researcher
,
23
(
6
)
:
73
–
88
.
Johnson
,
E.
2002b
.
“
Implementing a culture-inclusive curriculum
”
. In
Worlds of learning: Globalisation and multicultural education
,
Edited by:
Singh
,
M.
39
–
47
.
Sydney
:
Common Ground Publishing
.
McTaggart
,
R.
,
Henry
,
H.
and
Johnson
,
E.
1997
.
Traces of participatory action research: reciprocity among educators
.
Educational Action Research
,
5
:
123
–
139
.
Brown
,
W.
2000
.
“
Resisting left melancholia
”
. In
Without guarantees—In honour of Stuart Hall
,
Edited by:
Gilroy
,
P.
,
Grossberg
,
L.
and
McRobbie
,
A.
23
–
28
.
London
:
Verso
.
Ministry of Education and Training Victoria
.
(1984)
.
Curriculum development and planning in Victoria—Ministerial paper number six
.
Ministry Of Education and Training Victoria.
1991
.
Working for gender justice in schools
,
Melbourne
:
Ministerial Advisory Committee on Women and Girls
.
Johnson
,
E.
2002f
.
“They don't associate it with feminism”: In-service educators’ conceptions of the gender inclusive curriculum
.
Journal of In-service Education
,
29
:
31
–
47
.
Johnson
,
E.
2002a
.
Gender inclusive policy developments in Australia
.
Journal of Educational Policy
,
17
:
1
–
14
.
Johnson
,
E.
(1998a)
,
December
.
A feminist critique of gender inclusive curriculum policy in primary schools from 1975 to 1995
. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education ,
Adelaide University
,
Aldelaide
.
Johnson
,
E.
(1998b)
.
A feminist critique of gender inclusive curriculum policy in Victorian primary schools from 1975 to 1995
.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation
,
Monash University
.
Johnson
,
E.
2002e
.
The significance of professional development ideals and realities for the transformative potential of gender inclusive policy in a changing policy context
.
The South Pacific Journal of Education
,
31
:
153
–
170
.