Teaching in Higher Education

ISSN: 1356-2517 (Print) 1470-1294 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cthe20

Gender, post-truth populism and higher education

pedagogies

Penny Jane Burke & Ronelle Carolissen

To cite this article: Penny Jane Burke & Ronelle Carolissen (2018) Gender, post-truth
populism and higher education pedagogies, Teaching in Higher Education, 23:5, 543-547, DOI:
10.1080/13562517.2018.1467160

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1467160

Published online: 30 May 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1445

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cthe20
TEACHING IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2018
VOL. 23, NO. 5, 543–547
https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1467160

INTRODUCTION

Gender, post-truth populism and higher education

pedagogies
Penny Jane Burkea and Ronelle Carolissenb
a
Centre of Excellence for Equity in Higher Education, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia;
b
Department of Educational Psychology, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa

Across varying global contexts, significant feminist contribution has been demonstrated
through gains in education, such as the high level of female participation in higher edu-
cation in many countries worldwide (Leathwood and Read 2009). Policies of access and
equity have contributed to growing diversity in higher education, and female students
have increasingly out numbered male students in many higher education contexts,
leading in some cases to processes of ‘gender mainstreaming’ (David 2016a). However,
the recent rise of populism in some regions of the world, together with the apparent res-
onance of ‘post-truth’ narratives, suggests an emerging formation of power concerned
with the undoing of hard-won gains in relation to gender and other intersecting forms
of inequality and difference. Increased incidences of the public articulation of misogynistic
and racist discourses (particularly via social media) and the apparent legitimation of these
practices in some high-profile instances (including the President of the United States of
America, Donald Trump), point to the ongoing and urgent need for feminist critique,
as well as wider social movements for women’s and LGBTQI rights and equalities. This
indeed has led to new social movements, such as #metoo against sexual violence and har-
assment, aiming to empower women to take a stand against institutionalized sexism. This
has been taken up by feminist scholars to explore
how the issues being raised by #metoo are manifest in the everyday practices of the contem-
porary university, what political and interpersonal tensions are brought forth by various
responses to the issues and how might we best respond to such tensions (Kenway et al. 2018).

Higher education has a key role to play in deconstructing the issues connected to contem-
porary social movements on emergent formations of power. This includes challenging the
anti-education, anti-expertise and anti-intellectual strands of post-truth populism, as well
as paying attention to the ways that gendered inequalities are potentially reproduced
through pedagogical spaces and formations of difference (Burke, Crozier, and Misiaszek
2017). This special issue pays close attention to the relationship between gender, power
and higher education pedagogies in the context of current political struggles and divisions
attached to competing claims to ‘truth’, ‘fake news’ and ‘post truth’ discourses.
It has been argued that processes of ‘gender mainstreaming’ have often been used ‘to
dismiss the necessity of feminist analysis’ (David 2016a). Gender mainstreaming tends
to ignore feminist analyses of context and difference with the ‘frequent use of gender-
neutral language in laws produc[ing] inattention to gendered power relations’ (David

CONTACT Penny Jane Burke pennyjane.burke@newcastle.edu.au

© 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
544 P. J. BURKE AND R. CAROLISSEN

2016a, 65–66). The dis/connections between gender mainstreaming, the undermining of

feminism and the rise of post-truth populism requires in-depth analysis to understand
its implications for teaching, teachers and students in a range of different pedagogical con-
texts. Over the past decade, feminist scholars have brought attention to moral panics
attached to ‘masculinity in crisis’ discourses and the perceived ‘feminization’ of teaching
and learning in higher education (Leathwood and Read 2009; Burke 2015). Although fem-
inist scholars have provided detailed, extensive and close-up critique of masculinity in
crisis discourses, including in schooling contexts (Epstein et al. 1998), the simultaneous
mainstreaming of gender equity has arguably undermined feminism and weakened
anti-sexist policies and practices in higher education (David 2016a). For example,
although feminist research has exposed rape culture and ‘lad culture’ on campus
(Phipps and Young 2015), feminist scholars argue that policies remain woefully
inadequate, not only for students, but also for women and feminist academics (e.g.
David 2016b; Burke, David, and Moreau 2018).
Feminist critiques of the ‘feminization of higher education’ have also pointed to
ongoing binary divisions at play in universities that privilege the rational over the
emotional and undermine an ethics of care, potentially marginalizing those dispositions
associated with femininity (Burke 2015, 2017). Scholarship focused on intersectionality
has engaged with the ways gender intersects with a range of social and cultural differences
including class and race (see for example Mirza (2015) on ‘embodied intersectionality’).
Furthermore, despite a long-term commitment to widening participation in many
national contexts, research on teaching in higher education has minimally engaged ques-
tions of participation, to contribute to theoretical understanding of what constitutes ‘par-
ticipation’, particularly in relation to gendered power relations and intersecting social
inequalities (Burke, Crozier, and Misiaszek 2017). Although there have been attempts
to raise the profile of teaching in higher education across different national contexts
through moves towards ‘modernizing the university’ for the twenty-first century, many
of these considerations tend to reinforce neoliberal discourses of marketization, position-
ing teachers as service providers and students as educational consumers. Consequently,
the complex dynamics of pedagogical relations and experiences in relation to gendered
practices and subjectivities has been largely absent from research on teaching and learning
in higher education (see Burke, Crozier and Misiaszek 2017; Carolissen and Bozalek 2017).
Building on the body of work that has examined teaching in higher education in
relation to gender, diversity and difference, this special issue considers the complex
relationship between different and competing political forces at play, how these political
forces shape pedagogical practices in complex ways and how this re/produces relations
of gender and difference. This includes consideration of the pedagogical challenges
posed by the rise of populism in relation to gender equity in education; the potential
for feminist interventions in pedagogies and practices in post-truth, populist and author-
itarian contexts and critical consideration of which truths matter, whose truths matter and
who gets to decide what is truth. The special issue explores the relationships and the ten-
sions between feminisms and activism including the dis/connections between the tempor-
alities of the academy and of popular discourses, and how feminist interventions circulate,
for example through digital media. Considering the particular challenges for feminist edu-
cators of diverse backgrounds in educational institutions and in the context of the rise of
post-truth populism, the special issue addresses the affective dimensions of gendered and
 TEACHING IN HIGHER EDUCATION 545

pedagogical formations in populist, post-truth contexts. In developing gender sensitive

frameworks, pedagogical strategies require attention to the relationship between theory
and practice, as well as the politics of knowledge and being a knower. This special issue
examines such questions in relation to (re)framing feminist epistemologies, which tend
to foreground constructivist perspectives, in the context of ongoing assaults on ‘truth’;
the ways media literacies offer pedagogical forms within and against a post-truth world
and the resultant research agendas for higher education scholars.
Emily Danvers begins examining such themes with a feminist rethinking of the onto-
logical construction of the ‘critical thinker’ illuminating the implications of the decontex-
tualized discourse of critical thinking in higher education. Her reflection helps shed light
on the ways that the desire for a particular notion of the critically thinking subject masks
power relations and the politics of difference from view. Drawing on empirical data,
Danvers shows that be(com)ing a critical thinking student is tied to gendered, embodied
performatives and subjectivities. This is a valuable reflection on a highly taken-for-granted
dimension of becoming a recognizable subject as university student, entangled with claims
to knowing and tied in with embodied and gendered ontologies.
Jessica Gagnon builds on this with a focus on the politics of misrecognition, with her
analytic focus on the experiences of daughters of single mothers in the UK. She argues
that histories of pathologization, tied to notions of (il)legitimacy – both within and
outside of university contexts – continue to play out in ways that mis/frame higher edu-
cation pedagogical relations and experiences. She points to the complicity of academic
research in producing negative constructions of single mother families through its
decontextualized analyses and normalization of the heterosexual nuclear family form.
Through her important analysis, Gagnon outlines significant spaces for feminist
approaches to re/frame the problem of who is seen as a legitimate student in (and
beyond) higher education.
However, feminist pedagogies do not provide a straightforward solution to the complex
power dynamics that circulate around knowledge production and ontological positioning.
Indeed, Judy Rohrer eloquently articulates that the ‘interdisciplines’ (e.g. Women’s,
Gender and Ethnic Studies) have been complicit in the rise of neoliberalism, making it
‘more difficult to respond effectively in the classroom to the current upsurge within the
U.S. in racism, xenophobia and post-truth populism’. Her important analysis examines
the entanglement of the ‘interdisciplines’ in the institutionalization of neoliberal corpor-
atization of the university over past decades, to then contextualize an approach she
names ‘its in the room’, which points to the often discomforting truth that whatever
the social justice issue being explored, it is almost always a presence in the classroom.
Through this, Rohrer helps to emphasize the urgent need for deep, critical and careful
reflexivity.
This theme of ‘it’s in the room’ is helpful when considering the power of the populist
discourse against ‘intellectual-elites’ of whom teachers in higher education might be cast.
Barbara Read examines two aligned but distinctive discourses: ‘Real World Anti-Elitist’
and the ‘Ivory Tower Rationalist’ to uncover their gendered, classed and raced underpin-
nings. She argues that these discourses can be linked to distinct epistemological and onto-
logical conceptions of the nature and purpose of academic knowledge, with significant
implications for conceptions of ‘truth’ and ultimately the nature and purpose of higher
education.
546 P. J. BURKE AND R. CAROLISSEN

A feminist and Freirean perspective brings light to processes of ‘curriculum activism’.

Natalie Jester argues that curriculum is a key site of contestation, and points to the value of
bringing in the voices of those historically marginalized from curriculum development.
Analysing two digital campaigns as curriculum activism, Why is my Curriculum White
(established by a group of UCL students in 2017) and Women Also Know Stuff (established
in 2016 by a group of academics in the US) Jester argues for a pedagogy of difference to
recognize the multidimensional, relational and complex nature of power relations in
higher education. This curriculum activism she locates as part of fourth wave feminism,
one that focuses on difference and intersectionality and that draws on digital technologies
as a pedagogical tool and a space for marginalized voices to be mobilized and articulated.
This is an article that captures the hope and excitement of new ways of being and doing
through deep engagement with feminism in all its trans/formations.
This includes post-humanist feminisms, which shed new light on teaching and the
affective and everyday experiences of uncomfortable pedagogical encounters. Sherilyn
Lennon, Tasha Riley and Sue Monk draw on their experiences of ‘uncomfortable teacherly
moments’ to foreground the affective over the rational and to reposition teaching within
an ethics of care, criticality and concern. Taking from Barad’s (2007) concept of onto-
ethico-epistemology, they show that what we know is inextricably tied to how we know.
Through an analysis of their everyday experiences as teachers, they examine how emotions
and the physical feelings they produce become entangled in the material and discursive
realities of pedagogical practices and identities and the intensive nature of teaching.
They reframe the ‘act of teaching as unstable, political, performative and entangled in
the words/worlds of others’ to ‘push back’ against the rationalism and reductivism of neo-
liberalized higher education.
Themes of care-fullness are also explored by Sara Motta and Anna Bennett in their
analysis of enabling education. They critique ‘care-lessness’ and posit three dimensions
of care-full pedagogical practice; care as recognition, care as dialogic relationality and
care as affective. Drawing on feminist Freirean pedagogical approaches they argue for
embodied praxis by foregrounding the centrality of caring work as part of the ethico-ped-
agogical commitments to care as a multidimensional pedagogical praxis within the field.
In the final Points of Departure contribution to this special issue, Jessica Ringrose pre-
sents a charged and powerful analysis of the potential of digital pedagogies to create a ped-
agogical platform for the visibility of feminist critiques against post-truth populism. She
locates this within her own pedagogical work and in the context of the presidential election
and Donald Trump’s ‘dramatic win’ in late 2016. Ringrose with her colleague Victoria
Showunmi draw on this moment as an opportunity to engage students in deep sociological
analysis, drawing on the tools of Black feminist and intersectional feminist theories. Ring-
rose shows the power of digital feminist activism and how it might be put to work in the
classroom.
It is perhaps also important to ask what the omissions in submissions and final pieces
are in terms of significant feminist scholarship that challenges post-truth populism. One
notable absence is the specific tradition of feminist decolonial work that draws on inter-
sectionalities (see for example the special edition of Journal of Feminist Scholarship).
This special issue – a collection of eight significant pieces of feminist scholarship and
intervention, at a moment of and against post-truth populism – contributes to the peda-
gogical spaces of Teaching in Higher Education. It is our hope that these eight pieces spark
 TEACHING IN HIGHER EDUCATION 547

you the reader’s pedagogical imagination to create spaces of critique and hope, to recog-
nize what and who is in the room, and to contribute to transformational practices through,
within and beyond higher education.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References
Barad, J. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter
and Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Burke, P. J. 2015. “Re/Imagining Higher Education Pedagogies: Gender, Emotion and Difference.”
Teaching in Higher Education 20 (4): 388–401.
Burke, P. J. 2017. “Difference in Higher Education Pedagogies: Gender, Emotion and Shame.”
Gender and Education 29 (4): 430–444.
Burke, P. J., G. Crozier, and L. Misiaszek. 2017. Changing Pedagogical Spaces in Higher Education.
Diversity, Inequalities and Misrecognition. London: Routledge.
Burke, P. J., M. David, and M. P. Moreau. 2018. “Policy Implications for Equity, Gender and
Widening Participation in Higher Education.” In The Oxford Handbook of Comparative
Higher Education Systems and University Management, edited by G. Redding, S. Crump, and
T. Drew. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carolissen, R., and V. Bozalek. 2017. “Addressing Dualisms in Student Perceptions of a Historically
Black and White University in South Africa.” Race Ethnicity and Education 20 (3): 344–357.
David, M. E. 2016a. A Feminist Manifesto for Education. Cambridge: Polity Press.
David, M. E. 2016b. Reclaiming Feminism: Challenging Everyday Misogyny. Bristol: Policy Press.
Epstein, D., J. Elwood, V. Hey, and J. Maw. 1998. Failing Boys? Issues in Gender and Achievement.
Buckinghamshire: Open University Press.
Kenway, J., R. Barron, D. Epstein, and M. Wolfe. 2018. “#Metoo in the Contemporary University:
Probing Possibilities Through Everyday Scenarios.” Abstract for workshop to be presented at
the gender and education association 2018 conference, University of Newcastle, Australia,
December 9–12 2018.
Leathwood, C., and B. Read. 2009. Gender and the Changing Face of Higher Education: A Feminized
Future? Berkshire: Open University Press.
Mirza, H. 2015. “Decolonizing Higher Education: Black Feminism and the Intersectionality of Race
and Gender.” Journal of Feminist Scholarship 7/8: 1–12.
Phipps, A., and I. Young. 2015. “‘Lad Culture’ in Higher Education: Agency in the Sexualization
Debates.” Sexualities 18 (4): 459–479.