Feminist educators, such as Carolyn, M. Shrewsbury, have continuously worked to question the traditional patriarchal structure of education. The idea of Feminist pedagogy emerged from struggling to build a platform that values and recognizes women’s contributions, as well as creating a successful and liberating experience for all students in the classroom.
Carolyn M. Shrewsbury uses her article, “What Is Feminist Pedagogy?” to further educate her readers on the theory, describing it as “a vision of what education might be like but frequently is not.” The theory suggests breaking away from the traditional patriarchal structure of education, in order to work towards eventually turning that vision into a reality. Shrewsbury further illustrates this vision as some sort of transformation, turning the traditional classroom into “a liberatory environment in which we, teacher-student and student-teacher, act as subjects, not objects.” The transformed learning environment will allow us to “engage with others in a struggle to get beyond our sexism and racism and classism and homophobia and other destructive hatreds and to work together to enhance our knowledge [and] engage with the community, with traditional organizations and with movements for social change” (8).
Sadly, we live in a society in which people experience different levels of social, political and/or economic discrimination, whether it’s individual or structured. Members of dominant groups are considered to have more access to privileges while having a lack of challenges or barriers because of their powerful position in society. Whereas members of minority groups experience disadvantages, oppression, barriers and challenges because of their lower reputation/position in society. So, living under the means of a patriarchal society means that men are members of a dominant group and the women are members of the minority group. This means the traditional patriarchal structure of education is male-dominated, as it promotes male privilege, power, control and the oppression of women. Shrewsbury expresses that “focusing on empowerment” can help to push those traditional patriarchal means of power and domination behind us, which “embodies a concept of power as energy, capacity, and potential rather than as domination” (10).
“Empowering classrooms are places to practice visions of a feminist world, confronting differences to enrich all of us rather than to belittle some of us. Empowering pedagogy does not dissolve the authority or the power of the instructor. It does move from power as domination to power as creative energy” (11).
In my opinion, this is an extremely beneficial tool to use in the classroom because it helps to encourage both students and teachers to respect one another and their differences, as well as remove the uncomfortable power standard that is placed between them. Teachers can use this strategy to speak on difficult topics that usually aren’t spoken about both in and outside the classroom walls, due to the traditional patriarchal ‘rules’ that society has placed on the education system. This can help to build community between the teachers and students, as well as avoid the fear of generating discussions and making connections with one another about these very real and important subjects.
This brings us back to the Shrewsbury’s vision of the theory: a “liberatory classroom” that will strive, as it rebuilds the foundation of the traditionally controlled learning environment, turning it into a place where “members learn to respect each other’s differences rather than fear them” (8). I really enjoyed Shrewsbury discussion about her vision of the “liberatory classroom” because I found myself making connections to the classes that I have taken with Professor Savonick! In each class, we always talked about these avoided societal topics that are usually unspoken about because society thinks of them as complicated, or scary or too complex. These topics were never really brought up in high school, so I wasn’t really knowledgeable about any of them…until I signed up to take her course for the first time. I absolutely loved how open and comfortable we were when we were discussing about and connecting to these topics. Since it was my first time diving deep into a lot of these sometimes difficult subjects, I really appreciated how we learned through emotion, which is the total opposite of how traditional patriarchal learning is. Personally, learning through emotion helped me to develop a better understanding for what we were learning and helped other students to draw connections from their own lives, which was shared with the rest of the class. Her classes are full of individuals who are accepting, non-judgmental, caring and open to learning anything, and if there was a difficult subject to discuss, she would always guide us through it as best as she can, and she did great! I really feel as if Professor Savonick’s class is Shrewbury’s vision of the “liberatory classroom” because of the community that she builds between her and her students through her patience and honesty with each and everything we learn!
Discussion Questions:
- Does Shrewbury’s vision of the “liberatory classroom” remind you of a personal experience you may have had in the past? If so, explain what that experience was like and how it made you feel. If not, explain how you would envision a “liberatory classroom” and how it would make you feel, compared to a traditional patriarchal classroom.
- Describe what your own vision of a “liberatory classroom” would look like in the eyes of a student, or in the eyes of an educator.
- If you had to persuade/convince to a dominant patriarchal group member that feminist pedagogy is essential in the learning system, what would you say?
Works Cited:
Shrewsbury, Carolyn. What is Feminist Pedagogy? 1993.
