Search results

This study explores how the context of a classical Christian school (CCS) interacted with a how teacher taught and how students learned and experienced a unit about World War II.

A sixth-grade class was observed during their 13-day unit on World War I. The teacher was interviewed before the unit began to understand her goals for the unit and was interviewed after for her to reflect on her teaching and student learning. All classroom documents (notes, worksheets, essays) were collected. After the unit, each student participated in a think aloud of the assessment and reflected on their experiences during the unit.

The findings suggest that teacher and students were greatly impacted by the classical Christian nature of the school. The teacher used three biblical themes to frame the unit, which caused misconceptions for students. While students learned factual information about World War II, they struggled to relate the teacher's themes to World War II.

This study adds insights about teaching and learning history in a CCS and highlights the need for more research to explore what and how students in private religious schools are learning. While the teacher's themes could have been useful organizing concepts for the material, they instead complicated student learning.

Although this chapter situates all violence against women as a human rights issue, it emphasises ‘culturalised’ forms of this violence, such as honour-based violence/abuse, forced marriage and female genital mutilation. The authors draw upon their respective research to highlight how these forms of gendered violence have been subjected to a process of culturalisation. The chapter shows that while this process has raised awareness of previously under-researched forms of abuse and highlighted some of the contextual differences between women’s experiences of violence more broadly, its overemphasis on culture and cultural pathology has resulted in policy and legislative responses that do not always benefit victims. Ultimately, this chapter aims to problematise ‘culturalised’ understandings of violence in diverse communities and to show how current policy, legislative and support responses fail to adequately address the intersectional needs of black and minority ethnic victims/survivors.¹

This explorative paper is based on the professional career of Councillor Gill Sargeant who completed her term of office as Mayor of the London Borough of Barnet, in May 2001. This paper chronicles the life of a twenty‐first century woman living and working in a “digitally” lead age, faced with the challenges of a traditional business environment. The paper also identifies the impact of key “drivers” and “barriers” to the development of women's careers such as, childcare responsibilities, technology, gender stereotypes and family friendly policies, as faced by a modern day Mayor.

The PRCA December 2020 census tells us that, in the United Kingdom, the public relations (PR) industry continues to be predominantly female, with 68% of respondents ticking that box. It also highlights a ‘gender pay gap’ of 21%, an increase of 7% from March 2020 and states that ‘this can be explained by the fact that the respondents … are largely in senior roles which tend to be more male dominated’ (PRCA, 2020), thus demonstrating a leadership gap as well as a pay one. Both of the leading PR professional membership bodies in the United Kingdom – the PRCA and CIPR – acknowledge the gender pay and leadership gaps, made starker in an industry dominated by women, and have committed to tackle the disparity.

In this chapter, I build on Liz Yeomans' (2020) work, in which she suggests ‘new avenues for researching neoliberalism and postfeminism in PR’ (p. 44) to examine the ‘apparently progressive moves’ (Yeomans', 2020) by women's networking organisations. I analyse website texts from two women-only PR networking organisations – Women in PR and Global Women in PR – to explore the ways in which they construct their function, purpose and role, and to examine their position vis-à-vis the contemporary postfeminist media culture (Gill, 2007). The research takes a feminist, discourse analytic approach and sheds light on the reality of women in PR as constructed by organisations whose stated goal is to: ‘improve equality and diversity across the industry by increasing the number and diversity of women in leadership roles’ (Women in PR, 2022).

The author looks at how advertising aimed at cisgender men has shifted over the last two decades, moving from standard representations of hegemonic forms of masculinity to the adoption of the language and style of “postfeminist authenticity.” Drawing on a range of insights from across the social sciences and using the examples of three popular grooming products, Axe, Gillette, and Dollar Shave Club, the author critically examines the manner in which these new campaigns emphasize individual self-improvement and consumption choices as a means to solving the problems generated “by traditional, supposedly inauthentic, expressions of masculinity.”

This chapter explores women leaders’ outward appearance in the male-dominated world of rail, through the lenses of postfeminism and neoliberalism. Drawing on 31 interviews with women leaders in rail, it maps how a postfeminist logic is evident in women leaders’ narratives of aesthetic femininity. Aesthetic femininity refers to women leaders’ outward appearance which they describe as feminine. The research participants justify their feminine ‘work style’ through postfeminist themes of individual choice, natural sex differences, irony, personal initiative, skill and empowerment. The findings also show a patterning of justification around aesthetic femininity that fits a neoliberal self-governance as enterprise, self-flexibility and self-confidence. It is argued that whilst these iterations of aesthetic femininity are rooted in postfeminist and neoliberal contexts, they have consequences for sustaining gendered inequalities and traditional feminine norms in the highly masculinised culture of rail. Women’s narratives, whereby gender inequalities are acknowledged then subsumed into individualised agency through dress and appearance, do little to challenge the gendered culture in this sector.

The notion of constitutionalism and federalism as principal devices for limiting the power of government is central to F. A. Hayek’s political philosophy. A number of political scientists have recently criticized Hayek’s (as well as J. M. Buchanan’s and B. R. Weingast’s) reasoning on this subject for its presumed “neoliberal bias.” This paper reviews this critique and takes it as a challenge to clarify certain ambiguities in Hayek’s – and, more generally, in liberal – accounts of constitutionalism and federalism.

This chapter shares work carried out to use the discipline of Informing Science as a lens to carry out an analysis of the discipline of entrepreneurship. Focusing first at the level of the entrepreneurship discipline itself, recently advanced frameworks for practice-as-entrepreneurial-learning and for the scholarship of teaching and learning for entrepreneurship (SoTLE) are built upon using Gill’s work on academic informing systems to develop a framework that encourages viewing the entrepreneurship discipline as a system that informs entrepreneurial practice. While this may sound self-evident, we will explore how it implies something quite different from the teaching–research–scholarship paradigm to which most of us are accustomed.

In this chapter, we draw on trans-informed theoretical frameworks to provide insights into gender justice and gender democratization in Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC). Our purpose is to illuminate the systemic impact of cisgenderist and cissexist beliefs which refer to the legitimation of birth-assigned gender identity and what this means for embracing a critical project of gender expansiveness in the ECEC classroom. More broadly, we explicate how our engagement with trans studies informs a critique of existing debates about masculinities, boys and male teachers in the early years. We draw on the work of trans scholars in the first part of this chapter to ground an epistemological basis for our understanding of gender expansiveness and masculinities that challenges a cisnormative framing of gender justice in ECEC. In the second part, we draw specifically on scholars in the field who have been pivotal in elaborating what we understand to be gender expansive identities and what this means for thinking about gender justice in the early childhood classroom. In the third part, we reflect on the pedagogical implications of boyhood sissiness through a trans-informed lens and explicate its implications for understanding boys and masculinities in the early years. Finally, we draw on transgender studies-informed perspectives on masculinity which call for ‘de-essentializ[ing] masculinity as grounded in a cis-male body’ (Gottzén & Straube, 2016, p. 217) and explore their implications for re-envisioning masculinities as a gender-transformative project in ECEC.