Overcoming False Privilege
“The denial of men’s over privileged state takes
many forms in discussions of curriculum change work. Some claim that men must be central in
curriculum because they’ve done most of what’s important or distinctive in life
or civilization. Some recognize sexism
in the curriculum but deny that it makes male students seem unduly important in
life.” (McIntosh 5)
Based on what I have seen of the curriculum both as a student and as a student teacher, I am inclined to agree with McIntosh’s view of an androcentric approach to the curriculum. To be clear, I don’t agree that it is right; I just agree that it is a reality of the curriculum. I do; however, believe that more and more people are realizing the one-sidedness of the curriculum and are taking strides to make it more even between the sexes.
I have seen a change in subject matter through my classes during my undergrad. As a graduate of the English program, I can say from personal experience that my studies were split evenly between males and females, sometimes even catering more toward females. I appreciated the diversification. It didn’t necessarily start that way but by mid way through my third year and through the fourth I saw a change in the selection of literature provided by my professors.
Diversification of authors and subject matter is paramount to a healthy education; I hope to see it trickle down into the high school and grade school systems. It is easier for the Universities to change because the professors are able to select what literature they use. High schools and grade schools aren’t given that opportunity; they have pre-selected texts and pre-determined literature. It will take longer to change the content of a more structured curriculum but I am hopeful that it is possible.
K.D.
McIntosh, P. (1988). White privilege and male privilege: A personal account of coming to see correspondences through work in women’s studies. Working Paper No. 189. Wellesley: Wellesley College.
Based on what I have seen of the curriculum both as a student and as a student teacher, I am inclined to agree with McIntosh’s view of an androcentric approach to the curriculum. To be clear, I don’t agree that it is right; I just agree that it is a reality of the curriculum. I do; however, believe that more and more people are realizing the one-sidedness of the curriculum and are taking strides to make it more even between the sexes.
I have seen a change in subject matter through my classes during my undergrad. As a graduate of the English program, I can say from personal experience that my studies were split evenly between males and females, sometimes even catering more toward females. I appreciated the diversification. It didn’t necessarily start that way but by mid way through my third year and through the fourth I saw a change in the selection of literature provided by my professors.
Diversification of authors and subject matter is paramount to a healthy education; I hope to see it trickle down into the high school and grade school systems. It is easier for the Universities to change because the professors are able to select what literature they use. High schools and grade schools aren’t given that opportunity; they have pre-selected texts and pre-determined literature. It will take longer to change the content of a more structured curriculum but I am hopeful that it is possible.
K.D.
McIntosh, P. (1988). White privilege and male privilege: A personal account of coming to see correspondences through work in women’s studies. Working Paper No. 189. Wellesley: Wellesley College.