Resources
Each selected essay is introduced by its original author who updates the chapter topic. Drawing on examples from their own experiences, the authors provide practical classroom strategies such as readings and resources, writing assignments, classroom exercises, and guidance for using journals, multimedia workshops, and new technologies. (From the Publisher)
This essay is an introduction to postmodernism and deconstruction as they relate to the special challenges of scholarship and teaching in the science and religion multidiscipline.
Focuses on the tensions and contradictions within feminist pedagogy. Contradictory dimensions of feminists' locations in the academy; Power and authority; Pedagogy and performativity; Feminist difference and the politics of positionality; Claims of authority and the impossibility of normative judgments; Contradictions of institutional and pedagogical authority.
In much the same way that men are not taught to acknowledge all the ways they are privileged in society, whites are not taught to recognize how their status as white people confers on them many privileges. Arguing that male privilege and white privilege are interrelated, and that both types of privilege are unearned and unjustified, this paper begins by reviewing several layers of denial that men have about their privilege and that work to protect, prevent awareness about, and entrench that privilege. The paper goes on to present parallels from one woman's personal experience, with the denials that veil the facts of white privilege. Forty-six ordinary and daily ways in which this one individual experiences having white privilege within her life situation and its particular social and political frameworks, are listed, and ways in which the list applies equally to heterosexual privilege are also pointed out. It is concluded that all the various interlocking oppressions take two forms: an active form which can be seen; and an embedded form which members of the dominant group are taught not to see. To redesign the social system therefore requires acknowledgement of its colossal unseen dimensions. (DB)
Most white, middle-class citizens see society from a monocultural perspective, a perspective that assumes, often unconsciously, that persons of all races are in the same cultural system together. This single-system form of seeing the world, is blind to its own cultural specificity. People who see persons of other races monoculturally cannot imagine the reality that those "others" think of themselves not in relation to the majority race but in terms of their own culturally specific identities. This paper presents an "interactive phase theory" with regard to race that is intended to reassess school curricula in terms of heightened levels of consciousness concerning race. In the context of U.S. history courses, five phases are presented: phase one: all-white history; phase two: exceptional minority individuals in U.S. history; phase three: minority issues, or minority groups as problems, anomalies, absences, or victims in U.S. history; phase four: the lives and cultures of people of color everywhere as history; and phase five: history redefined and reconstructed to include all people. (DB)
This article discusses the evolution and impact of ethnic and women's studies on college campuses, noting the existence of about 700 ethnic and 620 women's studies programs. It responds to common criticisms (e.g., such programs emphasize differences and thus foster divisiveness) and notes challenges, both personal and institutional, offered by these programs.
In this article, Dwight Boyd focuses on a dilemma that is at the heart of sincere commitments to cultural pluralism. When the moral aspects of cultural diversity are fully appreciated, the "dilemma of diversity" is revealed as the tension point resulting from the acceptance of the fact of "reasonable moral pluralism" conjoined with the perceived need to morally ground prescriptive intentions to promote cultural diversity within a democratic society. After discussing this dilemma, Boyd analyzes three perspectives commonly found in response. He argues that each of these perspectives is inadequate by revealing how it fails to come to grips with one or the other side of the dilemma, despite its surface appeal. He then shows how, in each of these perspectives, this failure functions to conceal and protect dominant points of view within the diversity. He concludes by sketching out a positive direction for successfully addressing the dilemma of diversity hinted at in the successes and failures of each of the three perspectives.