Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Gender (im)Material: Teaching Bodies and Gender Education

Gender (im)Material: Teaching Bodies and Gender Education THE purpose of this paper is to insist on the sexed and gendered teaching body as ‘material’ to curriculum for gender education and gender equity in classrooms. It is not simply that the body of the teacher refuses to be excised, despite educational traditions of appealing to the mind as ‘above’ and transcending the body. It is that the sexed and gendered body of the teacher, male as well as female, must be the focus of more than censure if gender education projects are to be effective in generating useful pedagogical tools. In the paper, I give two reasons why the curriculum kit has been so visible and the teaching body so invisible. The first is the propensity of funding institutions to see a tangible ‘project’ such as a kit as the appropriate outcome of curriculum initiatives. The second is the ambivalence of many feminist educators about issues of bodily desire and pleasure in the context of a patriarchal society and culture. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian Journal of Education SAGE

Gender (im)Material: Teaching Bodies and Gender Education

McWilliam, Erica
Australian Journal of Education , Volume 41 (1): 11 – Apr 1, 1997
Download PDF
11 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/gender-im-material-teaching-bodies-and-gender-education-dbUV1NilND

References (6)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
© 1997 Australian Council for Educational Research
ISSN
0004-9441
eISSN
2050-5884
DOI
10.1177/000494419704100104
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

THE purpose of this paper is to insist on the sexed and gendered teaching body as ‘material’ to curriculum for gender education and gender equity in classrooms. It is not simply that the body of the teacher refuses to be excised, despite educational traditions of appealing to the mind as ‘above’ and transcending the body. It is that the sexed and gendered body of the teacher, male as well as female, must be the focus of more than censure if gender education projects are to be effective in generating useful pedagogical tools. In the paper, I give two reasons why the curriculum kit has been so visible and the teaching body so invisible. The first is the propensity of funding institutions to see a tangible ‘project’ such as a kit as the appropriate outcome of curriculum initiatives. The second is the ambivalence of many feminist educators about issues of bodily desire and pleasure in the context of a patriarchal society and culture.

Journal

Australian Journal of Education – SAGE

Published: Apr 1, 1997

There are no references for this article.