ABSTRACT

What kind of policy approach is most likely to improve significantly the outcomes of all girls? This has been a fundamental concern of feminist educators for many years. An important priority has been to investigate the reasons for discrimination against and differential achievement by girls and women in educational settings, their experiences in those settings, and strategies likely to bring about change. Since the 1970s the complexities of the situation have become more apparent (see Kenway, 1990). Women have learned much about what they share and what can be gained through collaborating with each other in the struggle for social change. At the same time, early assumptions about objectives and strategies have been undermined by the persistence of occupational segregation and the apparent determination by many girls and women to place a continuing priority on relationships and domestic concerns (Wilson and Wyn, 1987). Furthermore, it is now recognized that the experience of particular groups of girls and women is deeply influenced by their differing material and cultural circumstances; that to look at gender alone is insufficient and inadequate. The significant influence of other forms of social division (class and racial conflict, for example) in shaping the educational and social outcomes achieved by girls and women has been widely researched and clearly demonstrated. Educational policy has been increasingly influenced by the efforts of feminist teachers, policymakers and parents. The result of this influence and policy is evident in the feminist practices of many schools. These included, among much else, the use of single-sex classes, counter-sexist resources and support groups, and the development of particular classroom methods. However, despite all this laudable effort, it is not at all clear that it is achieving its desired effects. One of the reasons for this, in our view, is that policymakers and practitioners have failed to conceptualize their intentions adequately; more specifically, they have failed to clarify and identify the specific outcomes toward which they are working. Rather, intentions are couched in very vague generalities.