1 / 17

Scottish Universities Insight Institute Glasgow 23 June 2014 Joan Forbes & Gaby Weiner

Gender sensitive research in schools: gender, social class, economic wealth, and intersectionality. Scottish Universities Insight Institute Glasgow 23 June 2014 Joan Forbes & Gaby Weiner. Seminar Questions. What research approaches? Specific ethical issues applying to research

skah
Télécharger la présentation

Scottish Universities Insight Institute Glasgow 23 June 2014 Joan Forbes & Gaby Weiner

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Gender sensitive research in schools: gender, social class, economic wealth, and intersectionality Scottish Universities Insight Institute Glasgow 23 June 2014 Joan Forbes & Gaby Weiner

  2. SeminarQuestions • What research approaches? • Specific ethical issues applying to research • What contribution made to social justice and equity • Specific [participatory] methodological approaches used for hearing marginalised children’s views • What [methodological/research] lessons learnt?

  3. The Scottish Independent Schools Project (SISP) (2006-08) • Question: How do social and other capitals work in and through independent schools in Scotland? • Methodology: case study • Methods: • Analysis of school histories, magazines & other published documentation; school websites; • Observations of classrooms, assemblies, student & staff refectories physical amenities & resources, sports facilities, boarding accommodation [supplemented with field-notes of informal discussions with staff/students in these contexts]; • Interviews with school managers, teaching staff, department heads, heads of PE & directors of sport & one former student. All interviews tape-recorded and transcribed. • Focus groups of selected S2 pupils (13-14 year olds) • Questionnaire completed by whole S2 cohort in each school. • Researcher reflexive questionnaire – separate data collection in 2010-11 after main empirical study

  4. Schools in project: • Ailsa, urban, single sex (girls), all-age 500 -1000 students. • Brodie, urban, single sex (boys) primary and secondary stages school. 400 - 500 students, largely residential. • Cockburn, small town, all age, co-ed. 1000 – 1500 , mainly day, with c100 boarders. [Researchers, core of 4]

  5. Framing ideas… • Scottish policy and governance takes little account of the intersectional nature of aspects on in/equality such as the interlocking effects of gender and social class (F,Ö,W 2011). • Gender and other [intersectional]power relations are everywhere • Social structures and relations demand scrutiny and critique (Davies & Banks, 1992). • The research process itself necessitates scrutiny and critique

  6. Key intersectionalities in the project: • Wealth: Average fees (2013) £10, 173pa (day); £26,910pa (boarding). Extras: uniform, stationery, textbooks, lunch, English language tuition etc. • Exclusivity: 4.7% of pupil pop. in Scotland attend - in Edinburgh – 25% • Influence : Over 40% of Scottish ‘people of influence’ attended (1990) (Walford). • Internationality: 25% of boarders (2013) from ‘overseas’: viz. Germany 200+, Mainland China c160; Russia c80; Hong Kong c75; elsewhere in Europe c75; Spain c70; North America c27; South Asia c26; France c25; Nigeria c25

  7. Gender & class-based regimes • Ailsa: high aspirations for girls… (O). • Brodie: new men, caring masculinities’ discourse … positioned against … an essentialised discourse of boys needing space to run (M). • Cockburn: much emphasis on examinations, and girls clearly do well, the influential school sports culture clearly favoured the boys (E). (Forbes & Weiner 2014) (Regimes, see Connell 1987)

  8. Reflection: What research approaches? • Website analysis insightful, and generative; likewise open-ended student questionnaire ‘metaphor’ item • Case-study enabled rounded picture to be gained of institutional policies and practices • Post-research reflexive study productive but should have been included in main body of research

  9. Reflection: ethics • Documentation: SERA/BERA guidelines, access contracts with schools which agreed to participate (private institutions); • Access: extent to which ‘powerful researched’ seek to control access, the research process and outcomes • Research relations: between researched and researchers - cut-across by class, status, personal biographies –e.g. final feedback session

  10. Reflection: What contribution made to social justice and equity? • Necessary critique of gender and other norms & assumed practices. ‘What frames our seeing?’ (knowledge as perspectival, partial, provisional) • Importance of researcher reflexivity re- own self/positioning as researchers in the contexts of knowledge production and nature of the research process – including its power. • Cross –cutting investigation of impact of specific (economic, cultural and social) school [gender] regimes on research process. • Attention to practices that exclude, e.g. fee-charging; exclusive practices - space, time and resources etc…

  11. Reflection: What methodological/ research lessons learnt? • Importance of intersectionalities sensitivity in research: • Incorporate conscientisation of gender (and intersectionalities) in research at all stages • Investigate hierarchies of power/knowledge on both institutional re/productions and research design, implementation, and writing. • Interrogate social orderings of space-time evident in particular power/knowledge relations, i.e. networks, subjectivities, affect, and possibilities for agency. • Integrate reflexivity in research design (all aspects)

  12. Reflection: What methodological/ research lessons learnt? • Importance of conscientization Characterised by design of research which is alert to the [inter/sectional] cultural and social determination of gender roles and relationships in research, and the ethico-political imperative to strive for greater equality. Cf. Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: NY: Continuum

  13. Reflection: What [methodological/ research] lessons learnt? • Importance of researcher reflexivity Consciously reflexive as researchers - self-aware of positioning and [in this research] how specific socially, culturally and economically-privileged school regimes impact on research process. (Forbes, J. (2008) Reflexivity in Professional Doctoral Research. Reflective Practice, 9.4, 449-460)

  14. Reflection: What methodological/ research lessons learnt? Summary • Would we do it the same way again? • What might we have done differently? • Did the project actually do what we wanted? • How did we use intersectionalities – and to what effects e.g. conscious of economic wealth, social class, gender, and ethnicity?

  15. Selected project publications Forbes, J. & Weiner G. (2014) Gender power in elite schools: methodological insights from researcher reflexive accounts. Research Papers in Education, 29.2, 172-192. Forbes, J. & Weiner, G. (2013) Gendering/ed research spaces: insights from a study of independent schooling. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26.4, 455-469. Forbes, J., Öhrn, E. & Weiner, G. (2011) Slippage and/or symbolism: Gender, policy and Educational governance in Scotland and Sweden. Gender & Education, 23, 761-776. Forbes & Weiner (2008)Understated powerhouses: Scottish independent schools, their characteristics and their capitals. Discourse: Studies in the cultural politics of education, 29, 509-525. Horne, J. Lingard, B., Weiner, G. & Forbes J. (2011) Capitalizing on sport. ... British Journal of Sociology of Education, 32.6, 861-879.

  16. References • Arshad, R., Forbes, J. & Catts, R. (2007) The role of social capital in Scottish education policy. Scottish Educational Review, 39.2, 127- • Bishop, R. & Glynn, T. (1999) Culture counts: Changing power relations in education. Palmerston North, NZ: Dunmore Press. • Butler, J. (1990) Gender Trouble. New York & London: Routledge. • Connell, R.W. (1987) Gender and Power. Cambridge: Polity Press. • Davies, B. & Banks, C. (1992) The gender trap: a feminist poststructuralist analysis of primary school children's talk about gender. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 24, 1, 1-25. • Delamont, S. (2009) The only honest thing: Autoethnography, reflexivity and small crises in fieldwork. Ethnography and Education, 4.1, 51-63. • Gordon, C. (Ed.)(1980) Michel Foucault: Power/knowledge. Selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977. Brighton: Harvester. • Lather, P. (1993) Fertile obsession: validity after poststructuralism. The Sociological Quarterly, 34.4, 673-693. • Walford, G. (1990) Privitization and Privilege in Education. London: Routledge.

  17. Contact details: j.c.forbes@abdn.ac.uk gaby.weiner@btinternet.com

More Related