History
- For centuries access to education has been seen as a central policy initiative in the struggle for women’s equality. The popularity of gender equity issues wanes and waxes with public interest and political climate. There have been many changes to the public school system in Canada over the last hundred years. At specific historical moments, events have conspired to make gender equity more or less possible. In recent decades significant progress has been achieved in regards to gender equity within Canada. This paper will touch on the historical plight of women for education and human rights but will focus primarily on the women’s movement initiatives of the 1960’s and forward as this time marks the advent of modern educational equity practice and policy in Canadian schools.
- In Canada, we have experienced many issues similar to those of other countries with colonial pasts. Historically, public colonial schooling has been used as a tool of assimilation as well as promoting and upholding the status quo: “hegemonic male structures in society” (Arnot, 2009, p.38). Initial state education for women was dedicated to preserving the woman’s role as domestic; with an emphasis on vocation and service (Dillabough, 2009, pp38). Women’s education was carried out separately from men’s at institutions such as finishing schools, training homes/schools or women’s colleges. Subjects such as elocution, good manners, hygiene and temperance were subjects found in the 1911 Canadian curriculum (Parkay, 2007, pp277). Gender role stereotypes were intentionally reinforced by schooling. It was thought that women needed to be prepared for a life of childrearing and domestic chores. Gaskell and MacLaren cite Reverend Robert Sedgewick’s 1856 speech in Halifax NS (Gaskell and MacLaren, 1987, p.27):
As to the idea that woman has a self evident and inalienable right to assist in the government of the race, I reply she does assist in that government now, and would to heaven she would exercise a still larger share in its administration. But this great work, like all others, is naturally divided between the sexes, the nobler government of children belonging to women, the less noble government of adults to man (Sedgewick, 1856, p.13).
- The theory of natural distinction between the sexes was the main reason for exclusion of women from male post-secondary educational institutions (universities). The women’s movement of the late 19th century centered on lobbying for access to these institutions - for coeducation (Rosenburg, para.4). Access was eventually granted with some institutions being more open and progressive than others and total access was not achieved in North America until 1970 (Rosenburg, para. 5). Interestingly, some institutions relented and allowed women for financial reasons while others' hands were forced by the “growing need for women teachers” (Rosenburg, para 7.). The theory of natural distinction was eventually confirmed by psychologists who claimed that sexual differentiation was biological and that children needed to be sexually socialized through schooling for proper development and future success as adults (Gaskell and MacLaren, p.13). This practice of teaching gender as binary continued until modern science started to prove these beliefs to be false in the 1960’s.
The modern women’s movement in Canada (late 1960s)
- Education was identified as a key policy domain and important work was done in this field. The earliest initiatives centered on sex-role stereotyping in textbooks and relied heavily on a quantitative approach to stereotyping and reported how many times women and men appeared in stories and illustrations, and in what types of roles in the work force and family. It was found that textbooks were biased; policy was developed in response to this research in an attempt to increase the number and variety of images of women. “ By 1987 every Canadian province had guidelines for textbook selection and an evaluation grid to eliminate sex bias in learning materials” (Julien, 1987, p. 434).
- Closely tied to the concern of sex-role stereotyping in textbooks was an emerging assessment of women’s absence from the curriculum in general. Beginning in the 1970’s, a range of lesson plans and units were developed to assist teachers in implementing additional female-centric curricula. In 1970 the Royal Commission on the Status of Women Report stated, “Changes in education could bring dramatic improvements in the social and economic positions of women in an astonishingly short time. Equal opportunity for education is fundamental” (Gaskell and MacLaren, 1987, p.13). The Ontario Ministry of Education (1977) published a resource guide for teachers called Sex-Role Stereotyping and Women’s Studies, which included units of study, resource lists, and teaching suggesting for teachers at all grade levels. In 1974 B.C. Ministry of Education Special Advisory Committee on sex discrimination advisory: “On the Equal Treatment of the Sexes: Guideline for Educational Materials” to “make educators aware of the ways in which males and females have been stereotyped” (Gaskell and MacLaren, p.15). In 1977, the British Columbia Department of Education published a followed up with Women’s Studies: A Resource Guide for Teachers. Furthermore, the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education compiled The Women’s Kit (1974), a collection of print and audio-visual materials in addition to the Ontario Status of Women Council publication About Face: Towards a Positive Image of Women in Textbooks (Gaskell and MacLaren, p.15).
- This was the first stage of curricula reform policy, what has been called “the add women and stir” (Coulter, 1999, Pp115) model.
Early 1970s - Movement for Curricula Reform
- The Royal Commission on the Status of Women in Canada (the Commission) (1970) listed education as one of nine public policy areas “particularly germane to the status of women” (Royal Commission on the Status of Women in Canada, 1970, p. ix) arguing that sex-role stereotyping, the lack of strong female role-models for girls and inadequate career counseling were key factors contributing to women’s inequality in Canada. The Commissions report (1970), and an International Women’s Year in 1975 set the stage for feminist educators to take up the case for non-sexist schooling. The development of feminist and scientific research as well as the introduction of women’s studies courses at universities provided the language and theory for policy possibilities; the demands of the women’s movement created the political climate for policy development and change.
- This non-sexist policy was used by federal and provincial governments in an attempt to prove their commitment to women’s equality but it failed to affect the status quo in any fundamental way as it did not threaten existing power and economic arrangements. “Explanations drawn from sex-role socialization theory proved capable of driving a large number of initiatives stemming from 1980’s policy concerns about girls and women in science and technology” (Coulter, 1996, p. 447). With public attention given over to concerns about employment, the economy and to the politics of difference, public demand for further action in the area of schooling dwindled. Teachers who attempted to incorporate new research into public policies on gender equity were relatively isolated.
The 1980s
- By the mid-1980s, policies based on earlier research was critiqued as feminist scholars began to point out that many policies and practices of non-sexist education were based on assumptions that girls were somehow deficient lesser boys (Gaskell, McLaren and Novogrodsky, 1989, p.16). The goal of this program was to make girls more like boys; to make women ‘less defective men’ (Coulter, 1999, p. 115). It was observed that role-modeling programs and self-esteem workshops were based on the notion that individual girls must be helped. These types of programs lacked consideration of the very real material circumstances and barriers faced by young women. “Even those programs which did acknowledge barriers sought to ‘empower’ each girl to overcome the obstacles rather to challenge the obstacles themselves” (Coulter, 1996, p. 436).
- The sex-role stereotyping approach also was criticized from the radical feminist position for devaluing women’s feminine contributions: nurturing, care, and concern. Although it had long been obvious that women were underrepresented numerically and proportionally in administrative positions, the argument that women brought special attributes to leadership (that women were better listeners and team players, more democratic principals, and often were more effective in managing change) seems to have been more effective than simply justice or fairness arguments based on number and the concept of equality. What is at work here in women’s use of the ‘different but equal’ principle (MacKinnon, 1987, p. 38-39).
- During the 1980s and early 1990s, female educators lobbied for more women to be employed in educational administration. It is notable that the percentage of women teachers decreases at higher levels of education: “Women constitute about 95% of child care providers, 72% of elementary teachers, but only about 35% of secondary teachers and 17% of university teachers” (Danylewycz 1986, p.29). The percentages continue to drop as you look at the administration positions of principal and superintendent (Danylewycz, p.30).
- Research suggested that women bring different perspectives and strengths to leadership tasks; more women in administration could influence positive change in schools. In Ontario during the 1980s, the Federation of Women Teachers’ Associations of Ontario (FWTAO) and others lobbying for change tied the radical/cultural feminist arguments of women’s feminine attributes to the liberal feminist arguments on the importance of women in leadership roles in schools being visible to students (Coulter, 1996, p. 437). The eventual success of this lobby led to an amendment to The Education Act in 1988. The Ministry of Education required school boards to implement employment-equity programs with respect to the promotion of women to positions of power and added responsibility. By 1990, eight provincial ministries of education and school boards in six provinces had some form of equal-opportunity, affirmative-action, or employment-equity policy designed to improve women’s representation in administrative positions (Coulter, 1996, p. 437).
The 1990s
- By the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, interest and support for gender equity issues had waned. The full impact of economic restructuring was now being felt in the public sector and public education itself was under attack. Women proved to be particularly vulnerable to the neo-liberal agenda of reduced social spending. A new emphasis on individualism threatened the interpretation of gender-equity policies and teacher federation attention was focused on defending public education in general - out of necessity. Teachers were faced with threats to their job security, salaries, time, and autonomy and were less able to devote energy specifically to gender-equity issues. The political activity of the women’s movement shifted from issues in education and instead focused on employment, poverty and social security.
- During this time, another focus was developing projects to curb sexual harassment and of other forms of violence against female students. In Ontario, the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation (OSSTF), Ontario Women’s Directorate, and the Ontario Ministry of Education and Training (1995) co-operated in the production of a teaching resource called The Joke’s Over: Student to Student Sexual Harassment in Secondary Schools. In a unique study, the Canadian Teachers’ Federation (CTF) published A Cappella: A Report on the Realities, Concerns, Expectations and Barriers Experienced by Adolescent Women in Canada. As a result of this report, follow-up activities to educate teachers and youth workers about common problems faced by adolescent girls (self-esteem, harassment, and violence) were undertaken. Concurrently, much of the policy development by ministries of education and teacher federations around the safe-schools issue ignored the gendered dimension of violence and whether that violence was directed towards teachers or students.
- Ironically, the revaluing of women’s contributions and experiences has also led to some small initiatives involving boys’ education. Canadian schools have long encouraged boys to enroll in home economics or family studies classes and some provinces now make this mandatory. In New Brunswick and Quebec, for instance, Industrial Arts, Introductory Technology and Home Economics courses were compulsory for both girls and boys. A further example of this phenomenon is the ‘Boys for Babies’ project, which aimed to teach boys to overcome their doubts, fears and preconceptions about gender roles through learning to bathe, feed, diaper, play with and comfort real babies (Wells, 1991, p. 8). Although research and policy approach which reclaims and revalues women’s lives has some important benefits, it also has the effect of emphasizing women’s difference and ‘otherness’ from men as well as essentializing women’s experiences. “By itself, revaluing the female falls prey to condoning characteristics that women have developed in response to male domination” (Gaskell and MacLaren, p.18).
- A policy shift towards a more fundamentally critical anti-sexist approach is evident in the 1994 validation draft of the Ontario’s Ministry of Education and Training entitled Engendering Equity. It reflecting contemporary debates in post-structuralist feminist scholarship about education and advocated curriculum transformation that was much more than ‘adding on’ women. It noted that an inclusive curriculum ‘means rethinking the content, form, and context of curriculum’ and required that the ‘causes and patterns of sexism, racism, and all forms of discrimination and prejudice were explored and challenged’.(Ontario Minsitry of Education, 1994).
Conclusion
- Through analysis and political organizing, the Canadian women’s movement put women’s inequality on the agenda in Canada. Lobbying has created change and awareness although “governments often pass weak legislation or develop ‘soft’ gender equity through education policies, designed to offend no one” (Coulter, 1996, p. 443). The importance of laws and policies, however inadequate as they might be, should not be underestimated. They provide a necessary legitimation for educators to raise gender issues in schools and offer teachers and women an opportunity to work out the practical meaning of equity.
- In Canada, we have experienced many issues similar to those of other countries with colonial pasts. Historically, public colonial schooling has been used as a tool of assimilation as well as promoting and upholding the status quo: “hegemonic male structures in society” (Arnot, 2009, p.38). Initial state education for women was dedicated to preserving the woman’s role as domestic; with an emphasis on vocation and service (Dillabough, 2009, pp38). Women’s education was carried out separately from men’s at institutions such as finishing schools, training homes/schools or women’s colleges. Subjects such as elocution, good manners, hygiene and temperance were subjects found in the 1911 Canadian curriculum (Parkay, 2007, pp277). Gender role stereotypes were intentionally reinforced by schooling. It was thought that women needed to be prepared for a life of childrearing and domestic chores. Gaskell and MacLaren cite Reverend Robert Sedgewick’s 1856 speech in Halifax NS (Gaskell and MacLaren, 1987, p.27):
As to the idea that woman has a self evident and inalienable right to assist in the government of the race, I reply she does assist in that government now, and would to heaven she would exercise a still larger share in its administration. But this great work, like all others, is naturally divided between the sexes, the nobler government of children belonging to women, the less noble government of adults to man (Sedgewick, 1856, p.13).
- The theory of natural distinction between the sexes was the main reason for exclusion of women from male post-secondary educational institutions (universities). The women’s movement of the late 19th century centered on lobbying for access to these institutions - for coeducation (Rosenburg, para.4). Access was eventually granted with some institutions being more open and progressive than others and total access was not achieved in North America until 1970 (Rosenburg, para. 5). Interestingly, some institutions relented and allowed women for financial reasons while others' hands were forced by the “growing need for women teachers” (Rosenburg, para 7.). The theory of natural distinction was eventually confirmed by psychologists who claimed that sexual differentiation was biological and that children needed to be sexually socialized through schooling for proper development and future success as adults (Gaskell and MacLaren, p.13). This practice of teaching gender as binary continued until modern science started to prove these beliefs to be false in the 1960’s.
The modern women’s movement in Canada (late 1960s)
- Education was identified as a key policy domain and important work was done in this field. The earliest initiatives centered on sex-role stereotyping in textbooks and relied heavily on a quantitative approach to stereotyping and reported how many times women and men appeared in stories and illustrations, and in what types of roles in the work force and family. It was found that textbooks were biased; policy was developed in response to this research in an attempt to increase the number and variety of images of women. “ By 1987 every Canadian province had guidelines for textbook selection and an evaluation grid to eliminate sex bias in learning materials” (Julien, 1987, p. 434).
- Closely tied to the concern of sex-role stereotyping in textbooks was an emerging assessment of women’s absence from the curriculum in general. Beginning in the 1970’s, a range of lesson plans and units were developed to assist teachers in implementing additional female-centric curricula. In 1970 the Royal Commission on the Status of Women Report stated, “Changes in education could bring dramatic improvements in the social and economic positions of women in an astonishingly short time. Equal opportunity for education is fundamental” (Gaskell and MacLaren, 1987, p.13). The Ontario Ministry of Education (1977) published a resource guide for teachers called Sex-Role Stereotyping and Women’s Studies, which included units of study, resource lists, and teaching suggesting for teachers at all grade levels. In 1974 B.C. Ministry of Education Special Advisory Committee on sex discrimination advisory: “On the Equal Treatment of the Sexes: Guideline for Educational Materials” to “make educators aware of the ways in which males and females have been stereotyped” (Gaskell and MacLaren, p.15). In 1977, the British Columbia Department of Education published a followed up with Women’s Studies: A Resource Guide for Teachers. Furthermore, the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education compiled The Women’s Kit (1974), a collection of print and audio-visual materials in addition to the Ontario Status of Women Council publication About Face: Towards a Positive Image of Women in Textbooks (Gaskell and MacLaren, p.15).
- This was the first stage of curricula reform policy, what has been called “the add women and stir” (Coulter, 1999, Pp115) model.
Early 1970s - Movement for Curricula Reform
- The Royal Commission on the Status of Women in Canada (the Commission) (1970) listed education as one of nine public policy areas “particularly germane to the status of women” (Royal Commission on the Status of Women in Canada, 1970, p. ix) arguing that sex-role stereotyping, the lack of strong female role-models for girls and inadequate career counseling were key factors contributing to women’s inequality in Canada. The Commissions report (1970), and an International Women’s Year in 1975 set the stage for feminist educators to take up the case for non-sexist schooling. The development of feminist and scientific research as well as the introduction of women’s studies courses at universities provided the language and theory for policy possibilities; the demands of the women’s movement created the political climate for policy development and change.
- This non-sexist policy was used by federal and provincial governments in an attempt to prove their commitment to women’s equality but it failed to affect the status quo in any fundamental way as it did not threaten existing power and economic arrangements. “Explanations drawn from sex-role socialization theory proved capable of driving a large number of initiatives stemming from 1980’s policy concerns about girls and women in science and technology” (Coulter, 1996, p. 447). With public attention given over to concerns about employment, the economy and to the politics of difference, public demand for further action in the area of schooling dwindled. Teachers who attempted to incorporate new research into public policies on gender equity were relatively isolated.
The 1980s
- By the mid-1980s, policies based on earlier research was critiqued as feminist scholars began to point out that many policies and practices of non-sexist education were based on assumptions that girls were somehow deficient lesser boys (Gaskell, McLaren and Novogrodsky, 1989, p.16). The goal of this program was to make girls more like boys; to make women ‘less defective men’ (Coulter, 1999, p. 115). It was observed that role-modeling programs and self-esteem workshops were based on the notion that individual girls must be helped. These types of programs lacked consideration of the very real material circumstances and barriers faced by young women. “Even those programs which did acknowledge barriers sought to ‘empower’ each girl to overcome the obstacles rather to challenge the obstacles themselves” (Coulter, 1996, p. 436).
- The sex-role stereotyping approach also was criticized from the radical feminist position for devaluing women’s feminine contributions: nurturing, care, and concern. Although it had long been obvious that women were underrepresented numerically and proportionally in administrative positions, the argument that women brought special attributes to leadership (that women were better listeners and team players, more democratic principals, and often were more effective in managing change) seems to have been more effective than simply justice or fairness arguments based on number and the concept of equality. What is at work here in women’s use of the ‘different but equal’ principle (MacKinnon, 1987, p. 38-39).
- During the 1980s and early 1990s, female educators lobbied for more women to be employed in educational administration. It is notable that the percentage of women teachers decreases at higher levels of education: “Women constitute about 95% of child care providers, 72% of elementary teachers, but only about 35% of secondary teachers and 17% of university teachers” (Danylewycz 1986, p.29). The percentages continue to drop as you look at the administration positions of principal and superintendent (Danylewycz, p.30).
- Research suggested that women bring different perspectives and strengths to leadership tasks; more women in administration could influence positive change in schools. In Ontario during the 1980s, the Federation of Women Teachers’ Associations of Ontario (FWTAO) and others lobbying for change tied the radical/cultural feminist arguments of women’s feminine attributes to the liberal feminist arguments on the importance of women in leadership roles in schools being visible to students (Coulter, 1996, p. 437). The eventual success of this lobby led to an amendment to The Education Act in 1988. The Ministry of Education required school boards to implement employment-equity programs with respect to the promotion of women to positions of power and added responsibility. By 1990, eight provincial ministries of education and school boards in six provinces had some form of equal-opportunity, affirmative-action, or employment-equity policy designed to improve women’s representation in administrative positions (Coulter, 1996, p. 437).
The 1990s
- By the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, interest and support for gender equity issues had waned. The full impact of economic restructuring was now being felt in the public sector and public education itself was under attack. Women proved to be particularly vulnerable to the neo-liberal agenda of reduced social spending. A new emphasis on individualism threatened the interpretation of gender-equity policies and teacher federation attention was focused on defending public education in general - out of necessity. Teachers were faced with threats to their job security, salaries, time, and autonomy and were less able to devote energy specifically to gender-equity issues. The political activity of the women’s movement shifted from issues in education and instead focused on employment, poverty and social security.
- During this time, another focus was developing projects to curb sexual harassment and of other forms of violence against female students. In Ontario, the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation (OSSTF), Ontario Women’s Directorate, and the Ontario Ministry of Education and Training (1995) co-operated in the production of a teaching resource called The Joke’s Over: Student to Student Sexual Harassment in Secondary Schools. In a unique study, the Canadian Teachers’ Federation (CTF) published A Cappella: A Report on the Realities, Concerns, Expectations and Barriers Experienced by Adolescent Women in Canada. As a result of this report, follow-up activities to educate teachers and youth workers about common problems faced by adolescent girls (self-esteem, harassment, and violence) were undertaken. Concurrently, much of the policy development by ministries of education and teacher federations around the safe-schools issue ignored the gendered dimension of violence and whether that violence was directed towards teachers or students.
- Ironically, the revaluing of women’s contributions and experiences has also led to some small initiatives involving boys’ education. Canadian schools have long encouraged boys to enroll in home economics or family studies classes and some provinces now make this mandatory. In New Brunswick and Quebec, for instance, Industrial Arts, Introductory Technology and Home Economics courses were compulsory for both girls and boys. A further example of this phenomenon is the ‘Boys for Babies’ project, which aimed to teach boys to overcome their doubts, fears and preconceptions about gender roles through learning to bathe, feed, diaper, play with and comfort real babies (Wells, 1991, p. 8). Although research and policy approach which reclaims and revalues women’s lives has some important benefits, it also has the effect of emphasizing women’s difference and ‘otherness’ from men as well as essentializing women’s experiences. “By itself, revaluing the female falls prey to condoning characteristics that women have developed in response to male domination” (Gaskell and MacLaren, p.18).
- A policy shift towards a more fundamentally critical anti-sexist approach is evident in the 1994 validation draft of the Ontario’s Ministry of Education and Training entitled Engendering Equity. It reflecting contemporary debates in post-structuralist feminist scholarship about education and advocated curriculum transformation that was much more than ‘adding on’ women. It noted that an inclusive curriculum ‘means rethinking the content, form, and context of curriculum’ and required that the ‘causes and patterns of sexism, racism, and all forms of discrimination and prejudice were explored and challenged’.(Ontario Minsitry of Education, 1994).
Conclusion
- Through analysis and political organizing, the Canadian women’s movement put women’s inequality on the agenda in Canada. Lobbying has created change and awareness although “governments often pass weak legislation or develop ‘soft’ gender equity through education policies, designed to offend no one” (Coulter, 1996, p. 443). The importance of laws and policies, however inadequate as they might be, should not be underestimated. They provide a necessary legitimation for educators to raise gender issues in schools and offer teachers and women an opportunity to work out the practical meaning of equity.