See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/263117899

Girls' and boys' reasoning on cultural and religious practices: A human rights
education perspective

Article  in  Gender and Education · October 2012

DOI: 10.1080/09540253.2012.712096

CITATIONS READS

8 156

4 authors, including:

Annamagriet De Wet Cornelia Roux

North-West University Stellenbosch University
8 PUBLICATIONS   76 CITATIONS    49 PUBLICATIONS   525 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

K.H. (Ina) ter Avest

Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
40 PUBLICATIONS   153 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Human rights literacy: Quest for Meaning View project

Religious Education View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Cornelia Roux on 31 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [North West University]
On: 05 September 2012, At: 00:49
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Gender and Education

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cgee20

Girls' and boys' reasoning on cultural

and religious practices: a human rights
education perspective
a a a
Annamagriet de Wet , Cornelia Roux , Shan Simmonds & Ina
b
ter Avest
a
Faculty of Education Sciences, North-West University,
Potchefstroom, South Africa
b
Faculty of Education, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam,
The Netherlands

Version of record first published: 04 Sep 2012

To cite this article: Annamagriet de Wet, Cornelia Roux, Shan Simmonds & Ina ter Avest (2012):
Girls' and boys' reasoning on cultural and religious practices: a human rights education perspective,
Gender and Education, DOI:10.1080/09540253.2012.712096

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2012.712096

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-

conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 Gender and Education
2012, 1–17, iFirst Article

Girls’ and boys’ reasoning on cultural and religious practices:

a human rights education perspective
Annamagriet de Weta∗ , Cornelia Rouxa, Shan Simmondsa and Ina ter Avestb
a
Faculty of Education Sciences, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa;
b
Faculty of Education, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
(Received 12 May 2011; final version received 6 June 2012)
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

Human rights play a vital role in citizens’ political, religious and cultural life (Wang
2002, 171). Due to the prominence of human rights in the everyday life of citizens,
including those of South Africa, human rights education has been included in many
school curricula. Human rights education aims to develop responsible citizens who
inter alia foster an understanding of gender, ethnical, religious and cultural
diversities. This, it is hoped will encourage and maintain peace, as outlined in
the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Departing from a human
rights position, a qualitative study commenced in 2009 to explore how girls and
boys reason about the cultural and religious practices of girls in their
communities and families. Narratives by girls and boys highlighted their views
on girls’ positioning in their specific communities. From the findings it became
evident that the participants were aware of conforming to particular cultural and
religious practices. However, some participants also challenged how they
perceived these practices and the roles of girls in their communities. The article
highlights the necessity of embarking on a gendered perspective towards human
rights education.
Keywords: gender-based reasoning; human rights; cultural and religious practices;
gendered human rights; initiation; gender role

Introduction
The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (United Nations 1948) requires
human rights to be integrated into school curricula to foster a culture of respect, diver-
sity and peace. In South Africa, human rights, as outlined in the Declaration and
endorsed in the Bill of Rights (South Africa 1996), have been included in the Manifesto
on values, education and democracy (Department of Education 2001) and in the South
African policy on human rights across the curriculum (Department of Education 2003).
Key aspects embedded in this philosophy include cultivating understanding, tolerance
and respect for diversity in terms of religion, gender and ethnicity (Gearon 2006). These
key aspects need to be integrated within learning environments in which human rights
education has a legislative component as well as a holistic integrative component. Fun-
damental for this article is the latter which takes into consideration socio-ecological and
contextual dimensions in classroom environments (Bronfenbrenner 1981; Lohrenscheit
2002). We draw on a dimension of internalised knowledge of girls and boys from an
∗
Corresponding author. Email: annamagriet.dewet@nwu.ac.za

ISSN 0954-0253 print/ISSN 1360-0516 online

# 2012 Taylor & Francis
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2012.712096
http://www.tandfonline.com
 2 A. de Wet et al.

‘unconscious curriculum’ that they bring with them into the classroom (Gordon 2006,
4). Such an unconscious curriculum is formed by the experiences, worldviews, families
and communities in which children find themselves. We argue that the unconscious cur-
riculum of girls and boys influences how they conceptualise a particular gender
discourse.
Gender discourses can take different stances, ranging from oppositional binary
stances (Steyn and Van Zyl 2009, 3) to equality in educational contexts (Aikman
and Unterhalter 2005; Fennell and Arnot 2008; Martı́n Alcoff 2006; Riegel and
Ziebertz 2001; Skelton 2006; Terzi 2008). Gender discourse in this article is positioned
in girls’ and boys’ reasoning about gender, female and male interactional styles and tra-
ditional gender dichotomies (Sunderland 2004; Tannen 1994).
Related to how genders reason are the expectations of society for individuals to
adopt certain roles and social attitudes that could prescribe particular gender roles
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

(Knowles, Nieuwenhuis, and Smit 2009, 334). However, the authors question the
extent to which people are confined to certain roles. Pattman and Bhana (2009, 22) cor-
roborate this position stating that people are ‘active agents constructing their identities’
although they are also ‘constrained by the cultural resources available to them’. Pattman
and Bhana (2009, 22) refer to ‘constructed identities’ and ‘cultural resources’ that
necessitate the need to (re)consider the role of context in understanding the tension
between agency and culture in the construction of one’s specific views, beliefs,
morals and values. Some social issues that girls and boys grappled with in their narra-
tives are gender roles, norms, conforming to tradition and health issues. Acknowled-
ging the importance of the socio-cultural context enables us to comprehend what
gender-based reasoning on religious and cultural practices for girls entails (Fisher
2001, 53; Talbot 2001, 146).
This article first reflects on the narratives of girls and boys and how they perceive
the positioning of girls in their families and communities. Secondly, we want to under-
stand how gender shapes reasoning and the influence that the socio-cultural context
could have on gender-based reasoning. The views and reasoning of girls and boys
about cultural and religious practices performed on girls might inform human rights
education, both in curriculum development and dissemination by providing an under-
standing of how these practices influence girls. To better understand the phenomenon of
cultural and religious practices and its interception with human rights, the following
research questions were put:

. How do girls and boys perceive and reason about cultural and religious practices
that are meaningful for girls in their communities?
. What does gender-based reasoning entail for a gendered human rights education
perspective?

Theoretical underpinning of gender-based reasoning from a human rights

perspective
Robertson (2008, 455) argues that how people reason and how they are reasoned for by
others is influential to their behaviour and political life. South African political, social
and economic arenas embrace the philosophy of a democratic culture of human rights
and promote gender equality, freedom and human dignity (Carrim and Keet 2005). The
dynamic between gender, human rights and gender-based reasoning thus feature within
 Gender and Education 3

a democratic culture of human rights legislation and values. The implications of this
dynamic and how it is engaged with will now be explored.

Gender and human rights education

Since 1995, human rights education has been embodied in the proclamation of the
United Nations Decade for Human Rights Education (UNDHRE) (Keet 2007, 74),
the South African Constitution (South Africa 1996) and school curricula (Carrim and
Keet 2005). Evident in the UNDHRE plan of action (United Nations 1997), human
rights education is aimed at building a universal culture of human rights through knowl-
edge, skills and attitudes towards the promotion of understanding, tolerance, gender
equality and friendship among all nations, indigenous people and racial, national,
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

ethnic, religious and linguistic groups (United Nations 1948 article 26; United
Nations 1997).
Our stance is to argue from a moral underpinning in human rights education (Du
Preez 2008; Roux 2010), how girls and boys reason about religious and cultural prac-
tices. Our purpose was not to investigate the anthropological notions of religious and
cultural practices, but rather to explore the participants’ religious and cultural upbring-
ing and practices that may hamper their understanding and internalisation of human
rights with a moral underpinning (Roux 2009a).
Although human rights education covers a broad spectrum, this article focusses
predominantly on gender within a human rights discourse. Work done by Agosin
(2002), Belenky et al. (1986), Clinchy (1996) and Gilligan (1992) has been influen-
tial in debates about ‘knowing’,‘gender’ and ‘human rights’. The contribution of
Clinchy (1996), in her chapter on ‘Separate and Connected Knowing’, also acknowl-
edged the importance of gender and human rights education. ‘Separate knowing’
involves taking an autonomous stance and espousing a morality based on impersonal
procedures for establishing justice, whilst ‘connected knowing’, is in relation to
others in a manner which regards morality based on care (Clinchy 1996, 206,
218). These ways of knowing illustrate appreciative and engaging ways of under-
standing human rights (Winch 2006, 76).
We argue that human rights education should not promote justice autonomously,
without pertinently drawing attention to the element of care. The absence of a
balance between justice and caring may leave room for specific, individualised philos-
ophies to be prioritised in a manner which could bring about injustice. However, by
taking a connected approach directed towards care in addition to justice, there is an
engagement with human rights, which fosters a better consideration of ‘the other’
and creates attitudes toward mutual respect by all relevant parties (Noddings 1999).
In order to foster a disposition towards a gendered human rights education, we
propose that – in addition to autonomous knowing about human rights – a caring
and committed attitude towards human rights be highlighted. Care theorists such as
Noddings and Slote (2005, 348) argue that care theories focus on caring relations
based on sentiment in which the carer and cared for both interact in a caring manner
to consider each other. From a human rights education point of view, caring should
also promote the understanding of diversity in such a manner that it takes cognisance
of the needs of ‘the other’ (Levinas 2006) and also an understanding of the socio-
cultural contexts of those affected by decisions and implementations relating to
human rights.
 4 A. de Wet et al.

Gender and reasoning

Research on gender could become caught up in particular gender discourses that ‘both
seduces and restricts us’ in our perceptions on how girls and boys perceive particular
phenomena (Paechter 2006, 253). We take another stance that although men and
women are not homogeneous, it is problematic to prescribe interactional styles for
men and women (Talbot 2001, 144). For this reason, we choose not to have precon-
ceived ideas, nor place extensive prominence on oppositional binaries. We will focus
instead on how individuals make judgments that is, how they reason about their
experiences and/or viewpoints. We argue that in order to contribute to the notion of
gender-based reasoning, the perception and reception of social structure, style, genre
and discourse plays a significant role (Sunderland 2004).
Discourse on gender-based reasoning can take two forms. One form gives attention
to the structure of what has been said/written and the other considers the discourse
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

embedded in the message. The structural element helps to ascertain whether a

certain logic of reasoning is present and then to identify the strength of that reasoning
or argument presented with regard to the content (Fisher 2001, 17). The approach
emphasising the embedded discourse, takes into consideration the influence of the
socio-cultural contexts of the individual, as well as the underlying grand narrative(s)
that influence the person’s reasoning (Fisher 2001, 50; Talbot 2001, 146). The socio-
cultural contexts influencing the person, as well as the person’s perception and recep-
tion, in turn influence the way the situation is judged. We do not regard these
approaches to gender-based reasoning as being in opposition to one another but
rather as complementary to the reasoning process. Poststructuralist perspectives
argue that gender is a process and that verbal interaction is where the process takes
place (Talbot 2001, 146). This viewpoint argues that gender is not static and fixed,
but constantly in production and changeable, which makes it culturally constructed
in nature (Butler and Salih 2004, 23). What this can entail for gender-based reasoning
is that people are inclined to reason collectively from what goes on around them,
whether it is related to mainstream patterns in their society or minority interests
(Kibble 1998, 59; Winch 2006, 76). In this careful reflection and reasoning, individuals
rely on their internalised knowledge, values and morals shaped by their culture and/or
religion. It is necessary to make inferences about how people perceive and receive situ-
ations and experiences so that one may become sensitised to the views of ‘others’. Only
when we can embrace variations in gender and also variety in culture, religion and tra-
dition can we truly strive towards a gendered human rights perspective in education.
Dieltiens et al. (2009, 365) refer to concepts of ‘gender-blind’ and ‘gender-lite’ in
discussions on gender equity. ‘Gender-blind’ regards genders as universally equal sub-
jects where education is distributed equally amongst genders, disregarding the need to
focus on gender because policy has no differential impact on girls and boys (Dieltiens
et al. 2009, 368). ‘Gender-lite’ allows for a policy that makes room for the variations in
gender to some extent and acknowledges the need to identify particular conditions of
girls. Thus, policy recognises genders as equals but ‘fails to contextualise the source
or remedy for injustice’ (Dieltiens et al. 2009, 368). Although this article is not report-
ing on gender equity in particular, by giving cognisance to the concepts ‘gender blind’
and ‘gender-lite’ one can develop alternative ways of understanding what a gendered
human rights education could signify.
If human rights education is ‘gender-blind’ and/or ‘gender-lite’ in its approach, it has
the propensity for human rights to be represented superficially, which can fabricate a
 Gender and Education 5

‘problematic gendered agency’ (Gordon 2006, 1) where the desire to be an ‘agentic’

individual is compromised by ambivalence and contradiction (Gordon 2006, 1). We
argue that a gendered human rights perspective should endeavour to foster a disposition
which takes into account the individual’s perception and reception of her/his socio-
cultural context (the ‘unconscious curriculum’) in order to embrace variations in gender
in a manner that avoids mere distribution to, and/or recognition of gender alone. This,
inherently, could have an impact on human rights education curricula and practice to
enhance its effectiveness in promoting understanding and tolerance of ‘the other’.
In order to support these notions and arguments empirical data gathered from two
schools, as part of a pilot study of an international research project, are presented below.

Research process
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

The data presented emanate from the international-funded South African Netherlands
Projects for Alternative Development project (Roux 2009a). This project involves
five universities in South Africa and one in the Netherlands. In this phase of the
project, a pilot study was only conducted in South Africa with a Grade 7 class in
one primary school to ascertain whether the proposed narrative brief would elicit the
voices of girls and boys regarding their experiences and perceptions of religious and
cultural practices of girls. However, after analysing the data, it became evident that par-
ticipants interpreted the narrative question ambiguously. It was then decided that the
project should conduct a second pilot study, in which participants created posters
before writing their narratives, for which terminology were briefly explained. For elab-
oration on this process, the context and participants of each pilot study will be discussed
separately in the section ‘Context and participants’ below.
The two schools used in the pilot studies were purposefully selected in co-operation
with the North West Department of Education and researchers, who are familiar with
the schools in this region. In both schools, the girls and boys were selected firstly
because they are in the age-group in which they have developed different voices,
e.g. – voices of resistance and voices of compliance towards their cultural and religious
practices (Arnot 2006, 412). Secondly, they were selected because of their diverse
economic, cultural, religious and social backgrounds. Though both schools are
private schools with a Christian ethos, the girls and boys stem from multi-cultural
and multi-religious communities and live either in metropolitan or in township areas
of the selected city in the North West Province of South Africa.

Context and participants

School 1: pilot study 1
The first pilot study was conducted in November 2009 in a private Christian primary
school in the metropolitan region of the selected city. This school is situated next to
a university and draws girls and boys from the urban and the rural areas. Although
the ethos of this school as well as the teachers is mono-religious, the girls and boys
have multi-religious and multi-cultural backgrounds. A sample group of Grade 7 par-
ticipants aged 12–14, consisting of 14 girls and 7 boys, participated in writing the nar-
ratives. Each participant was given a sheet of paper with the narrative brief printed on
the top of the page. Participants were given approximately 60 min to write their narra-
tive. If they asked the researcher questions pertaining to the nature of the brief, the
 6 A. de Wet et al.

researcher asked them to make their own interpretations. This process was followed in
an attempt to ascertain how these girls and boys interpret the concepts being explored.

School 2: pilot study 2

The second pilot study was conducted in March 2010 in another private school in the
same city. This school is situated on the edge of the industrial area and next to the town-
ship area and thus draws girls and boys predominantly from economically deprived
homes in the township. The school had one combined Grade 6 and Grade 7 class,
thus 10 girls and 20 boys aged 12–16 of this combined class participated.
The method of inquiry for this pilot study differed from the first pilot study in two
primary ways. Firstly, participants were asked to work in groups and create a poster
illustrating how they understand human rights. The intention was that the participants
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

would start to collectively engage with the key concepts of the research. Secondly, the
girls and boys were given definitions of the main concepts in the narrative brief to help
them better understand what was being asked of them. Participants were given approxi-
mately 60 min to write their narrative and if they asked the researchers for clarification
of the terms in the narrative brief, they were given simplified definitions of terms, which
we had agreed upon beforehand.

Ethical considerations
We had no difficulty in gaining access to schools. Both schools welcomed the research
and saw it as a learning opportunity for their students. Ethical consent to conduct the
research was confidently received from gatekeepers such as: the provincial Department
of Education, North-West University, school principals, participants and parents/care-
givers. The project also assured participants that their narratives would remain anon-
ymous, confidential and will only be used for project purposes.

Methodology and methods of data collection

This empirical investigation comprised qualitative and exploratory research elements
because of our interest in drawing on ‘sense making’ of the data collected (Cochran-
Smith and Lytle 1993; Patton 2002; Shield and Dervin 1993). We chose narrative
inquiry as a method, drawing on the notion that narratives provide the space for
people to make sense of an experience and to connect events into a whole (Chase
2003, 79; Elliot 2006, 6; Hutto 2007). Narrative inquiry furthermore creates a space
for individuals to reflect, evaluate and orientate their own understandings of their situ-
ations as well as the situations of others (Hutto 2007, 2).
The research paradigm for the project was designed to be an interpretavist nar-
rative research paradigm, where narratives, as discourses with a clear sequential
order can ‘provide a connection of events in meaningful ways’ (Roux 2007, 508).
We argue that there is an authentic voice through which we can gain access to
understand the epistemology, processes and reasons with results where experiences,
fear, judgements and appreciation for circumstances can be communicated (Elliot
2006, 9; Roux 2009a, 4).
The narrative enquiry was to locate the participants’ experiences, to define their nar-
ratives as own life stories and to inform and define the multiple identities and roles in
their own culture (Doyle and Carter 2003). We believed girls’ and boys’ experiences
 Gender and Education 7

and their ‘inner self’, written down as narratives, would generate rich data to answer
and inform the research questions. The methodology fits the aim of the larger project
to ‘respond to subtle and noticeable discrimination emanating from cultural, religious
and traditional practices’ (Roux 2009a). The reasoning stems from the written narra-
tives themselves, and not from conversations with their peers, the researchers and tea-
chers or through interviews.
Girls and boys were asked to each write a narrative in response to the following
brief:

Write about the religious and cultural practices of girls in your family and community.
Write about those practices that make you feel good and those practices that make you
feel not happy or sad (uncomfortable).
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

Taking cognisance of how participants viewed girls and their positions in their own
families and communities is important, as it could provide some clarity on the current
expectations and perceptions that communities and societies have of girls. We argue
that using narrative inquiry enables clarification from which further research can
emanate (Roux 2009b).

Problems encountered
When analysing the data from the first pilot study, it became evident that the girls and
boys interpreted the narrative question ambiguously. To solve this problem in the
second pilot, we added a poster-activity as described earlier, and provided some expla-
nations for concepts in the narrative brief.
A second challenge was the difficulty in separating religious and cultural practices.
Interpretation of the data was based on trends in cultural and religious practices as
described in the narratives. Religious and cultural practices of a specific ethnic or cul-
tural group were not addressed at this stage. It is important to note that from the data
given in the narratives, it seemed that the role of religious practices was a subordinate
one. One could argue that religious practices were insignificant to the participants;
however, we argue that this was a further indication that the narrative brief needs to
be explained to the participants without jeopardising the brief. On the other hand, it
indicates that in some traditional communities, religious and cultural practices are inter-
twined, as is the case in many African Religions.
A third challenge posed by this research was the age and articulateness of partici-
pants. Being children, participants were not always able to voice the different appli-
cations and meanings in their religious and cultural practices.
A fourth problem faced by the research was that of language barriers, (although the
participants could write in their home language) and how conceptual understandings
influenced feedback from participants.
Irrespective of these drawbacks, the narratives in the pilot studies still gave adequate
data on cultural practices. As researchers, we were not in the position to question the
participants’ understanding of the narrative brief and therefore analysed the narratives
on their face-value.1

Gender-based reasoning: findings and discussions

Narratives were obtained in the two pilot studies from 51 participants (n ¼ 51), of
whom 24 were girls (n ¼ 51:24) and 27 were boys (n ¼ 51:27). In the analysis of
 8 A. de Wet et al.

the narratives, we focussed on how girls and boys reason about cultural and religious
practices. We explored assumptions girls made about their own positions, and assump-
tions that boys made about girls’ positions with regard to the cultural and religious prac-
tices in their communities and families. Questions we asked ourselves included: ‘Do
girls and boys think and/or act differently’? and ‘How does their socio-cultural
context influence their perceptions and/or experiences presented in their reasoning’?
With these questions in mind, data were analysed holistically and in an interpret-
ative manner. From the socio-cultural context that was highlighted by girls and boys
in their stories, some of the complexities they encountered include: gender roles and
norms, conforming to tradition and health issues. Taking into account the detail as
well as the overall trend of each narrative, we were able to take into consideration
social issues which might have framed the socio-cultural context of the participants.
These included issues like HIV/AIDS, unwanted pregnancies, poverty, child-headed
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

households, alcohol abuse, forced marriages, abusive environments and uncritical con-
forming to tradition. With this approach, we could reveal the meaning embedded in the
data (Fairclough 2003, 3; Potter 2004, 610) and identify principal discourses (Cary
2007, 44).
The researchers in this article, (our gender being female), adopt feminist research
paradigms (Gatenby and Humphries 2000; Roux 2007). Our feminist perspectives
and interpretations have been shaped by our own experiences as females within our
societies, as well as our awareness of gender issues within South Africa specifically,
and related to the global community. This inevitably influences not only how we inter-
pret findings, but also our choices of research methodologies. Driven by methodologies
that attempt ‘to give voice to women’ (De Vos, Schulze, and Patl 2005, 7), we argue
that the research methodology ‘correspond[s] with the feminist element of narration’
(Ribbens and Edwards 1998; Roux 2009b, 133). We aim to gain knowledge that is
‘used for change’ (De Vos, Schulze, and Patl 2005, 7): ‘change’ is promoted
through knowledge about cultural and religious practices of/for girls. Girls are empow-
ered through human rights education to be able to respond to discrimination which ema-
nates from cultural, religious and traditional practices (Roux 2009a). We further draw
on the notions of Mohanty (2010, 455–7) as feminist researchers within a ‘feminist
cross-cultural knowledge base’.
Two main themes were identified from the data: theme one deals with girls’
positions in the home and community and theme two deals with cultural and religious
practices significant for girls. To embrace the discourses embedded in the narratives
(Phoenix 2008, 67), extracts from narratives are presented verbatim to illustrate how
girls and boys reason. In some instances, glosses in parentheses will be used if the ver-
batim word is not clear or language errors occur. We have also summarised some of the
content where a number of narratives (n) presented the same or similar stories or argu-
ments in reasoning, and then we specify further the number of participants who have the
same notion of reasoning (n ¼ //://) (Roux 2005).

Reasoning about the girl’s positions in the home and community

Both girls and boys reflected on girls’ positions in the home and in the community. One
of the first impressions that emanates from the narratives are the gender-based distinc-
tions that girls and boys make with regard to the roles of girls and women in their homes
and communities. It seems that the roles of girls are seen as part of the domestic prac-
tices of families and communities. A clear role division, especially when it comes to
 Gender and Education 9

household chores such as cooking and cleaning, became apparent. Both female and
male participants mentioned the role of girls with respect to domestic duties, as well
as the role of women in transferring cultural aspects to the younger generation.
Mention was also made of respect for elders (‘when an elderly person come to visit
we greet them to show respect’ school 1, girl 14), as well as a curfew for girls (‘girls
are not allowed to go late in the house’ school 1, girl 3). This, we interpret as an indi-
cation of participants’ gendered perceptions of girls in their communities.
The allocation of certain domestic duties features strongly in the data and it seems to
stand out in the minds of participants as something that defines girlhood or woman-
hood. Twenty-three of the fifty-one participants (n ¼ 51:23) – fourteen girls (n ¼
23:14) and nine boys (n ¼ 23:9) – highlighted the domestic duties of girls and
women in their narratives. The fact that so many of the participants wrote about
these duties in their narratives about religious and cultural practices indicates that par-
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

ticipants see this role allocation as embedded in their cultures and/or religions. Chores
mentioned in narratives include cooking, cleaning, sweeping the yard, washing the
dishes, doing laundry and looking after children. It became apparent that girls and
boys wrote about the same duties; however, they did so in a differently structured
manner (Fisher 2001, 17). While girls described their chores, boys gave distinct
reasons to justify the division of roles, tasks and chores. First, we explore this notion
from the girls’ perspectives, followed by the boys’ perspectives.

From the girls’ perspectives

Girls (n ¼ 23:14) described those chores that are designated to girls and women by
using words such as ‘must . . .’ (n ¼ 14:5) and ‘have to . . .’ (n ¼ 14:6) indicating the
obligation on females to perform certain tasks. Discourses of girls who wrote about
domestic duties did not only describe domestic duties as a must for girls, but also indi-
cated a perception on the side of girls that they are the ones who work harder, and
that boys do not often help. The use of wording such as ‘always’ (n ¼ 14:5), ‘every-
thing’ (n ¼ 14:1) and ‘all the chores’ (n ¼ 14:1) is an indication of girls’ reasoning
about the (in)justice and (un)fairness of the allocation of roles, duties and chores
(Gordon 2006, 7). One girl particularly raised her opinion about the seemingly unfair
division of tasks:

I think it’s bad that women have to do all the chores, e.g. cooking, washing the laundry
and of course washing dishes and cleaning the house whilst men do chores like washing
the car or just waking up to work only (school 1, girl 2).

This participant has reasoned about her position in the home and family based on
her experiences (Fisher 2001, 50; Talbot 2001, 146). It becomes evident that she experi-
ences an imbalance between the tasks or chores allocated to the genders and harbours a
sense of unfairness with regard to the duties of girls. Although having to go to work
may be just as hard as having to take care of the household and/or children, in her
reasoning it is not, and she feels that girls and women work harder than men. In
effect this participant is ‘constrained by the cultural resources available to [her]’ and
a tension between agency and culture emanates (Pattman and Bhana 2009, 22).
Another girl described the duties of girls, mostly cooking and cleaning, and the
different occasions on which she has to perform these duties (‘every Wednesday’,
‘every wedding’, at a ‘father gathering’, on a ‘spring clean’ Saturday and ‘every
 10 A. de Wet et al.

time after school’). Her repetition of the same duties which she has to perform on differ-
ent occasions is accompanied by her expression that she ‘mostly don’t like’ to wash the
dishes, and that boys often do none of the chores in the house and that it is done by
‘only girls, girls, girls’ (school 1, girl 7). Although she does not explicitly reason
about the fairness of the allocation of these duties, her narrative does reveal that she
has thought about the great responsibility she and other women in her community
face. Gordon (2006, 1) refers to ‘problematic gendered agency’ from the perspective
that there are often ambivalences and contradictions experienced by girls who detest
particular duties but perform them nevertheless because they feel morally obliged to
do so. In return they adhere to their expected and culturally constructed responsibilities.

From boys’ perspectives

Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

Whereas girls described the duties of females without providing reasons for the
arrangement, boys (n ¼ 23:9) did give some reasons or explanations as to why girls
and women are the ones who should cook, clean and raise children. Boys’ narratives
argued that women or girls cook and clean well or even better than boys or men
(n ¼ 9:2), that men or boys cannot (for example, cook) (n ¼ 9:2), that ‘men and
boys are stronger than women and girls’ (n ¼ 9:1), ‘men have to work’ (n ¼ 9:1),
‘woman are created to care for children’ (n ¼ 9:1) and ‘women are not created for gar-
dening’ (n ¼ 9:1). Embedded in the male discourses is the impression that the roles of
women are based greatly on ability (n ¼ 9:5), or for some, how they are ‘created’
(n ¼ 9:2). They do not question the status quo or reason about the possibility that
men and boys should be able to learn to do those chores traditionally assigned to
women (Knowles, Nieuwenhuis, and Smit 2009, 334).
Boys’ idea that women perform domestic duties for men, or for their husbands (n ¼
9:4) is possibly linked to gender scripts determining that men are the providers while
women are the ones who clean, cook and raise the children. Narratives of boys included
phrases such as ‘cook for man’ (school 1, boy 1), ‘cook for the husband’ (school 1, boy
2), ‘iron his clothes’ (school 1, boy 1) and ‘they (girls) have to cook for us’ (school 1,
boy 4). This may indicate the perception that women live for the purposes of making
life comfortable for men, or to serve their husbands and meet their needs. Boys’ reason-
ing in this regard reveals women as caregivers which could emanate from the departure
point of what is going on around them and their lived experiences (Kibble 1998, 59;
Winch 2006, 76).
In an exception to narratives discussed above, one boy (n ¼ 9:1) reasoned about the
fairness of role allocation as well as rights of women when he said:

Women should clean but should not be let to clean everyday because I think then you will
be abusing the specific female and they also should cook because they cook very well and
us as males should help the females here and there once in a while and should also con-
sider their feelings, In my culture or should I say my family it works both ways males and
females work together in unity, I personally on Sunday’s help my mother to peel the veg-
etables . . . my motto is ‘Why should we let women suffer while we [are] here’ because we
are all equal and should be treated the same way (school 1, boy 3).

This narrative indicates that this boy has given thought to the fairness of the duties
allocated to women as well as to the rights of women. It also indicates his disposition
towards care and how he thinks about women (Clinchy 1996, 206, 218). However, he
states that men (‘males’) ‘should help’ the women (‘females’) ‘here and there’ and only
 Gender and Education 11

‘once in a while’, while he himself helps his mother on Sundays only. Thus, the respon-
sibility for these duties remains with the women, and the men are not seen as equal part-
ners in exercising the tasks but merely as a helper for some of the chores some of the
time. This could initiate a compromised care relationship in which the onus rests on the
women but where men can display a caring disposition in support of the ‘responsibil-
ities’ of the women (Noddings 1999). The embedded discourse of the somewhat contra-
dictory position of this participant illustrates the culturally constructed nature of the
gender where gender is not static but dependent on the socio-cultural context in
which such individuals find themselves (Butler and Salih 2004, 23).
Analysing the narrative from a human rights education perspective, we looked for indi-
cations of tolerance and respect for diversity. It seems that this boy has been sensitised to the
rights of women since he refers to concepts and ideas emanating from human rights dis-
courses when he says ‘we are all equal’, ‘why should we let women suffer’ and ‘then
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

you will be abusing the specific female’. It appears as though he is aware of gender
equity issues, the right to equality as well as the abuse and suffering of women.
However, his contradictory discourse reveals a somewhat superficial understanding of
what it means to truly take the rights of others, in this case women, into consideration.
The next paragraph deals with findings pertaining to the specific traditional prac-
tices that the participants regarded as significant for girls in their communities and
families.

Reasoning about significant cultural/religious practices

In the narratives, girls and boys described various cultural and religious practices that
they view as significant. Attention was given to various cultural/religious practices and
customs, such as weddings, ceremonies held to thank ancestors, labola, traditional
dancing and initiation. This section explores the significance of only two specific prac-
tices described by girls and boys, namely traditional dancing (n ¼ 51:13) and initiation
(n ¼ 51:5).

Traditional dance
Fourteen participants (n ¼ 51:14), of whom ten were girls (n ¼ 14:9) and four boys
(n ¼ 14:4) made mention of cultural dancing, which is often performed as part of cul-
tural or religious celebrations and/or ceremonies. Both girls and boys view cultural
dancing as important – something beneficial to the individual and the community. Cul-
tural clothing, where girls dance with naked upper bodies, was also highlighted by five
participants (n ¼ 14:5; n ¼ 5:4 girls and n ¼ 5:1 boy). In South African cultures, cul-
tural and traditional dancing and celebrations typically take place when celebrating
births, marriages and the initiation to womanhood (from puberty to adolescence)
(Bowie 2006).
One of the girl participants wrote about dancing at a ceremony held to thank the
ancestors and gave her opinion about the importance of taking part in cultural
dancing. Her narrative reads as follows:

I think it is important to know about your culture and to take part in the cultural practices
. . . The children and women that is in the cultural dance are very strong and celebrate in
themselves when they dance their culture’ and are very proud about their own culture
(school 1, girl 4).
 12 A. de Wet et al.

Another girl had a somewhat different view when she wrote the following:

When I wear the titana2 I feel like I are in the grass and I feel uncomfortable I don’t wear
something to cave [cover] my breast it law of the cultural and they children to respect
elders my grandmother also teaches me to dance (school 2, girl 7).

The first participant (school 1, girl 4) reasoned about the importance and the value
of knowing and participating in cultural activities. She also reveals an awareness of
womanhood and the role the cultural dance plays in a woman’s identity. The second
participant (school 2, girl 7) is aware of womanhood and identity from the position
that it is very uncomfortable for her to appear with a naked upper body and the
titana (see note 1) exposing her intimate body parts. She is also aware of womanhood
when she places emphasis on how important traditional dancing is for grandmothers
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

who teach girls these dances. Both participants are active agents in the construction
of their cultural identities (Pattman and Bhana 2009, 22) and reason from their own
experiences (Winch 2006, 76).
As far as boys’ narratives are concerned, it seems that dancing is often performed by
girls while the boys watch. One of the boys indicated that he enjoyed watching the
dancing when he said ‘. . . they dance and they wear short skirts. I like is very much’
(school 2, boy 7). Another boy indicated that he ‘like watching Tswanas3 jive’ but it
makes him uncomfortable when girls ‘take out thy’re [their] boobs and bums’ when
they dance (school 2, boy 17).
Oppositional binaries stances (Steyn and Van Zyl 2009, 3) do not only transpire
between girls and boys, but also amongst girls, or even within girls themselves. The
narratives quoted indicate dualistic reasoning about traditional dancing amongst
girls. Human rights education, with a balanced approach, could contribute to creating
an understanding about practices of this nature and could try to develop an inquiring
mind in the child and to position girls’ own views of their religious and cultural prac-
tices. Creating cognisance of and articulating differences between various perspectives
could be the first step in eliminating a ‘gender-blind’ and/or ‘gender-lite’ (Dieltiens
et al. 2009, 365) stance and encourage more awareness towards a gendered human
rights education perspective.

Initiation practices
Some participants (n ¼ 51:6, n ¼ 6:4 girls, n ¼ 6:2 boys) wrote in their narratives
about the practices of initiation and/or circumcision for girls. Commonly, in South
Africa, initiation practices are conducted anywhere from the time of puberty to adoles-
cence to introduce girls or boys into adulthood, which makes them eligible for marriage
within their specific cultural groups.
One of the female participants revealed her uneasiness with initiation practices and
provided some detail about what exactly bothers her and why:

And when they mark people as a religion culture sign then people get sick and lose to
much blood. That’s when diseases passes. And they use the same blade on everybody
(school 2, girl 3).

This narrative may refer to either the practice of circumcision, or to the practice of
marking (by means of incision) the bodies of girls who have undergone virginity
testing. This girl specifically names the health risks of this practice as reasons for her
 Gender and Education 13

uneasiness with this practice. She seems to be concerned about the effects of this prac-
tice on other people. She adopts a caring disposition in her reasoning (Clinchy 1996,
218) and displays an ‘engaged’ understanding towards ‘the other’ (Winch 2006, 76).
This narrative allows us to reflect upon girls’ understanding of cultural and religious
practices which they experience in their communities and families. It creates an oppor-
tunity to become sensitised towards ‘the other’ in a caring manner (Noddings and Slote
2005).
A second girl gave more detail about initiation practices and described her frustra-
tion with the practice of female circumcision:

Some of the parents force the girls to go for a cultural practice called the Bojale which
means for them to go for circumcision. If we ask why, all they say is ‘You must get
married soon and after this practice all men are going to marry you soon’. This practice
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

is frustrating me. I wish us girls to stop going there corse [because] it’s not healthy and
it’s ugly. Other girls they do to this practice against their parents will, it’s like they are
escaping from home just to go to the practice. All they want is to be called a woman,
but again what’s the use of being called a woman if you did something so sad (school 2,
girl 5).

Traditional bojale is described by Tournas (1996, 31) as initiation rituals which

include ritual defloration and scarring along the inside of the thigh, often entailing
the pulling of the labia, and not necessarily circumcision. However, in this narrative,
the girl specifically describes circumcision, which is defined as the removal of the cli-
toris (South Africa 2005). She clearly advocates that the practice of female circumci-
sion should be stopped. She also highlights the health risks it poses when she
reasons that it is ‘not healthy’, ‘ugly’ and ‘sad’ for ‘us girls’. She speaks of girls collec-
tively when she refers to ‘us girls’ which could be the influence of her socio-cultural
context where it is expected of girls in her community and family to follow this practice
(Knowles, Nieuwenhuis, and Smit 2009, 334). Thus her disapproval of the practice is
based on more than just health issues, it draws upon care-talk (Noddings and Slote
2005, 348) which is aimed at changing people’s perceptions of what she views as
unjust behaviour.
The South African Children’s Act (South Africa 2005) affords every child less than
18years the right not to be subjected to social, cultural and religious practices that are
detrimental to their well-being (section 12(1)). Consequently, section 12(3) prohibits
the genital mutilation or the circumcision of female children, and section 12(7) prohi-
bits the marking of a girl’s body when she has undergone virginity testing. Neverthe-
less, some girls are still forced to undergo such practices and yet others choose freely to
participate, apparently in order to be called ‘a woman’.
The notion of being a ‘real woman’ as well as connecting female circumcision with
the assurance that you will get married and will be called a woman, is dealt with in the
narrative quoted here. Societal expectations of girls and women come to play in deter-
mining what a ‘real woman’ is, and perhaps creates some intolerance towards those
who do not fit this gender norm. The girl reasons about other girls who do not
object to the practice because they desire to become ‘real women’. Being called ‘a
woman’ appears to be a necessity for some girls, and they would undergo health
risks or discomfort in order to obtain such a status. She concludes with ‘what’s the
use of being called a woman if you did something so sad’. From her conclusion, it is
apparent that she has had particular experiences with this practice which have lead
her to reason about its moral and ethical implications (Talbot 2001, 146). Therefore,
 14 A. de Wet et al.

it is important to acknowledge that reasoning does not only derive from logical thought
in isolation of experiences and behaviour (Kibble 1998), but allows for expression of
feelings, emotions and attitudes (Noddings and Slote 2005, 248).

A gendered human rights education perspective

It is assumed that individuals are inclined to adopt the status quo with respect to certain
attitudes, values and beliefs which prescribe particular gender roles to them (Knowles,
Nieuwenhuis, and Smit 2009, 334). Findings reveal that individuals do not all adhere to
stringent gender roles but negotiate how they perceive gender and gender roles. This
negotiation is not clear-cut and presents what Gordon (2006, 1) refers to as the ‘proble-
matic gendered agency’, which often causes ambivalent and ambiguous representations
of the truth. The concept of gender-based reasoning stems from this premise and argues
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

that individuals of any particular gender will reason not only from their membership of
a specific gender group, but also from the experiences they encounter within their socio-
cultural contexts.
The socio-cultural context is important for educators as it acknowledges the inter-
nalised knowledge that girls and boys bring with them to school (Talbot 2001, 146). It
forms part of the ‘unconscious curriculum’ (Gordon 2006, 4), which emphasises that
girls and boys rely on their own experiences and opinions when they reason and not
only on logical and abstract thought (Kibble 1998, 59). As a result, they can be seen
as ‘active agents constructing their identities’ (Pattman and Bhana 2009, 22).
Human rights education, in aiming at promoting justice as well as enhancing mutual
understanding and respect among all citizens, needs to take this unconscious curricu-
lum of girls and boys into account by first determining what those knowledge
systems are, and then using that as a starting point when teaching concepts related to
gender and human rights.

Empowering girls
This research project aims to empower girls through human rights education to respond
to subtle discrimination emanating from cultural, religious and traditional practices
(Roux 2009a). Narrative inquiry provide girls with opportunities to express themselves
juxtaposed to sensitising them to issues of gender, human rights, culture and/or religion.
Whereas this article reports on the pilot to the study only, the larger project involves
exploration of cultural and religious contrasts in communities, social identities of girls
and reflection on curriculum theory and human rights issues to enrich discourses on the
empowerment of girls. Recommendations for curriculum development and teacher
training should assist educators to infuse human rights education as means for empow-
ering girls.

Conclusion
The way girl and boy participants in this project reasoned about cultural and religious
practices for girls, informs human rights education for both curriculum development
and classroom practice. We argue that not acknowledging the way in which girls
and boys reason might lead human rights education to overlook the real-life experiences
and real-life dilemmas they encountered. Through a holistic human rights education
approach, we promote a gendered human rights education perspective, where girls as
 Gender and Education 15

well as boys are not seen as universal equals but are embraced as ‘agentic’ individuals
(Gordon 2006, 1).
Thus, promoting a gendered human rights education will enhance respect for gender
and strive to create responsible citizens who foster an understanding of cultural, reli-
gious and ethnic diversity, which is inherently the aim of human rights education.
This might contribute to the creation of a new generation, empowered through literacy
of human rights issues, mindful of the gendered experiences and interpretations of girls
and boys, or women and men and respectful of individuality and communality.

Notes
1. In a forthcoming publication on piloting processes ‘Piloting: Refining and variation’ C.D.
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

Roux & I. Ter Avest.

2. Titana is a Sotho-word and it is a string of beads girls put around their waist when partaking
in this dance. Traditionally the girls will not wear underwear when dancing and it might be
that this was the case the girl participant referred to.
3. The Tswanas are one of the ethnic and language groups in South Africa.

References
Agosin, M. 2002. Women, gender and human rights. A global perspective. New Jersey: Rutgers
University Press.
Aikman, S., and E. Unterhalter. 2005. Introduction. In Beyond access: transforming policy and
practice for gender equality in education, ed. S. Aikman and E. Unterhalter, 1– 12. Oxford:
Oxfam.
Arnot, M. 2006. Gender voices in the classroom. In The SAGE handbook of gender and edu-
cation, ed. B. Francis, C. Skelton and L. Smulyan, 407– 21. London: SAGE Publications.
Belenky, M.F., B.M. Clinchy, N.R. Goldberger, and J.M. Tarule. 1986. Women’s ways of
knowing. The development of self, voice and mind. New York: Basic Books.
Bowie, F. 2006. The anthropology of religion: an introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Bronfenbrenner, U. 1981. The ecology of human development: experiments by nature and
design. London: Harvard University Press.
Butler, J., and S. Salih. 2004. The Judith Butler reader. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Carrim, N., and A. Keet. 2005. Infusing human rights into the curriculum: The case of the South
African revised national curriculum statement. Perspectives in Education 23, no. 2: 99 –110.
Cary, L.J. 2007. Curriculum spaces: Discourse, postmodern theory and educational research.
New York: Peter Lang.
Chase, S. 2003. Learning to listen: Narrative principles in a qualitative research methods course.
In Up close and personal: The teaching and learning of narrative research, ed. R. Josselson,
A. Lieblich and D.P. McAdams, 100 – 50. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Clinchy, B.M. 1996. Connected and separate knowing: Toward a marriage of two minds. In
Knowledge, difference and power. Essays inspired by women’s ways of knowing, ed.
N.R. Goldberger, J.M. Tarule, B.M. Clinchy and M.F. Belenky, 205 –47. New York:
Basic Books.
Cochran-Smith, M., and S.L. Lytle. 1993. Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Department of Education. 2001. Manifesto on values, education and democracy. Pretoria:
Government Printers.
Department of Education. 2003. Guidelines for the implementation of the ACE on integrating
values and human rights in curriculum. Pretoria: Government Printers.
De Vos, A.S., S. Schulze, and L. Patl. 2005. The sciences and the professions. In Research at
grass roots: For the social sciences and human service professions, 3rd ed., ed. A.S. De
Vos, H. Strydom, C.B. Fouché and C.S.L. Delport, 3 –26. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
 16 A. de Wet et al.

Dieltiens, V., E. Unterhalter, S. Letsatsi, and A. North. 2009. Gender-blind, gender-lite: A cri-
tique of gender equity approaches in the South African Department of Education.
Perspectives in Education 27, no. 4: 365 –74.
Doyle, W., and K. Carter. 2003. Narrative and learning to teach: Implications for teachers-edu-
cation curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies 35, no. 2: 129 –37.
Du Preez, P. 2008. Dialogue as facilitation strategy: Infusing a culture of human rights in
schools. PhD diss., Stellenbosch University.
Elliot, J. 2006. Using narrative in social research: qualitative and quantitative approaches.
London: Sage.
Fairclough, N. 2003. Analysing discourse: textual analysis for social research. New York:
Routledge.
Fennell, S., and M. Arnot. 2008. Gender education and equality in a global context: conceptual
frameworks and policy perspectives. London: Routledge.
Fisher, A. 2001. Critical thinking. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Gatenby, B., and M. Humphries. 2000. Feminist participatory action research: Methodological
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

and ethical issues. Women’s Studies International Forum 23, no. 1: 89– 105.
Gearon, L. 2006. Freedom of expression and human rights: Historical, literary and political
contexts. Brighton: Sussex Academic Press.
Gilligan, C. 1992. In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gordon, T. 2006. Girls in education: Citizenship, agency and emotions. Gender and Education
18, no. 1: 1 – 15.
Hutto, D.D. 2007. Narrative and understanding persons. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge
University Press.
Keet, A. 2007. Human rights education or human rights in education: A conceptual analysis.
PhD diss., University of Pretoria.
Kibble, D.G. 1998. Moral education: Dilemmas for the teacher. The Curriculum Journal 9,
no. 1: 51– 61.
Knowles, M., J. Nieuwenhuis, and B. Smit. 2009. A narrative analysis of teachers’ lived experi-
ences of motherhood and teaching. South African Journal of Education 29, no. 1: 333 –43.
Levinas, E. 2006. Entre nous: Thinking-of-the-other (reprinted). Trans. M.B. Smith and
B. Harshav. London: Continuum.
Lohrenscheit, C. 2002. International approaches in human rights education. International
Review of Education 48, nos. 3 –4: 173– 85.
Martı́n Alcoff, L. 2006. Visible identities: Race, gender and the self. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Mohanty, C.T. 2010. Under western eyes revisited. In Feminist theory reader, ed. C.R. McCann
and K. Seung-Kyung, 446– 81. New York: Routledge.
Noddings, N. 1999. Care, justice, equity. In The search for common ground in education, ed.
M.S. Katz, N. Noddings and K.A. Strike, 7 – 20. New York: Teachers College Press
Columbia University.
Noddings, N., and M. Slote. 2005. Changing notions of the moral and moral education. In
The Blackwell guide to the philosophy of education, ed. N. Blake, P. Smeyers, R. Smith
and P. Standish, 341 –55. Oxford: Blackwell.
Paechter, C. 2006. Masculine femininities/feminine masculinities: Power, identities and gender.
Gender and Education 18, no. 3: 253 –63.
Pattman, R., and D. Bhana. 2009. Colouring sexualities: How some black South African school-
girls respond to ‘racial’ and gendered inequalities. In The prize and the price: Shaping sex-
ualities in South Africa, ed. M. Steyn and M. Van Zyl, 21– 38. Cape Town: HSRC Press.
Patton, M.Q. 2002. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. London: Sage Publications.
Phoenix, A. 2008. Analysing narrative contexts. In Doing narrative research, ed. M. Andrews,
C. Squire and M. Tamboukou, 64– 78. London: Sage.
Potter, J. 2004. Discourse analysis. In Handbook of data analysis, ed. M. Hardy and A. Bryman,
607– 25. London: Sage.
Ribbens, J., and R. Edwards. 1998. Introducing our voices. In Feminist dilemmas in qualitative
research: Public knowledge and private lives, ed. J. Ribbens and R. Edwards, 2– 22.
London: Sage.
 Gender and Education 17

Riegel, U., and H.G. Ziebertz. 2001. Mädchen und jungen in der schule. In Religionsdidaktik, ein
leitfaden für studium, ausbildung und beruf, ed. G. Hilger, S. Leimgruber and H.G. Ziebertz,
361– 8. Muenchen: Kösel-Verlag GmbH and Co.
Robertson, E. 2008. The value of reason: Why not a sardine can opener? In Philosophy of edu-
cation: An anthology, ed. R. Curren, 448 –57. Oxford: Blackwell publishers.
Roux, C. 2005. Religion in education: Perceptions and practices. Scriptura. International
Journal of Bible, Religion and Theology in Southern Africa 2, no. 89: 293 –306.
Roux, C. 2007. Collaboration in teacher education through research in multicultural education.
South African Journal for Higher Education 21, no. 3: 503 –19.
Roux, C. 2009a. Human rights education in diversity: Empowering girls in rural and metropo-
litan school environments. South African Netherlands Projects for Alternative Development
(SANPAD). Project Application, 10.
Roux, C. 2009b. Religion education as praxis: Voices and narratives on teaching and learning
experiences. Alternation 3: 112 –37.
Roux, C. 2010. Religious literacy and human rights literacy as prerequisite for human rights
Downloaded by [North West University] at 00:49 05 September 2012

education. In International handbook for inter-religious education, ed. G. Durka, L. Gearon,

M. de Souza and K. Engebretson, 4 Vols., 991–1015. Dordrect, The Netherlands: Springer.
Shield, V.R., and B. Dervin. 1993. Sense-making in feminist social science research: A call to
enlarge methodological options of feminist studies. Women’s Studies International Forum
16, no. 1: 65 – 81.
Skelton, C. 2006. Boys and girls in elementary school. In The SAGE handbook of gender and
education, ed. B. Francis, C. Skelton and L. Smulyan, 139– 51. London: SAGE
Publications.
South Africa. 1996. The Bill of Rights: Chapter 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of South
Africa. http://www.info.gov.za/documents/constitution/1996/96cons2.htm.
South Africa. 2005. Children’s Act, 38 of 2005. Pretoria: Government Printers.
Steyn, M., and M. Van Zyl. 2009. The prize and the price: Shaping sexualities in South Africa.
Cape Town: HSRC Press.
Sunderland, J. 2004. Gendered discourses. Chippenham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Talbot, M.M. 2001. Feminism and language. In The Routledge companion to feminism and post-
feminism, ed. S. Gamble, 140 – 8. London: Routledge.
Tannen, D. 1994. Gender and discourse. NewYork: Oxford University Press.
Terzi, L. 2008. Justice and equality in education: A capability perspective on disability and
special educational needs. New York: Continuum.
Tournas, S.A. 1996. From sacred initiation to bureaucratic apostasy: Junior secondary school-
leavers and the secularisation of education in southern Africa. Comparative Education
32, no. 1: 27 – 43.
United Nations. 1948. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948. http://www.un.org/en/
documents/udhr/.
United Nations. 1997. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR): United
Nations Decade for Human Rights Education and Plan of Action (1995 –2004). Report of
the Secretary General. 20 October 1997. http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/education/
training/decade.htm.
Wang, Z. 2002. Toward a postmodern notion of human rights. Educational Philosophy and
Theory 34, no. 2: 171– 83.
Winch, C. 2006. Education, autonomy and critical thinking. London: Routledge.

View publication stats