To challenge Uni/Prof re Canon?

[Harriedharriet]

I am doing a few courses in Uni at the moment. They are history courses and the University is well known and respected. In both courses women are not mentioned before the 19th C. They did not exist it seems. Actually, apologies, prostitutes did.
I understand the issues and to some degree accept why there is not much more than a minor nod to women in the Canons/course work. However, I think there needs to be academic compensation, a caveat in ALL courses that state why that is.

A lecture on the laws, rules and regulations that were in place at the time to limit the participation of women would go a long way to compensate in my opinion.
AIBU to challenge the ProfA. (V intimidating prospect. 😬)

See that is really crap Sporadicus. Writing is one of the few areas of the arts where women have a decent representation.

My DD is currently studying A level English Lit and we had a great chat last night about Jane Eyre, Wild Sargasso Sea and Esme Lennox and the whole issue of women not fitting into their accepted role in society.

Exactly, Sporadicus and travellingbird.

I've said this on here before but in my university course first term we had all term with a week each on various themes - all male authors - and the final week was "Women". All of them.

StVincent but it should be in here i.e. mentioned and acknowledged in the course. What should be? Precisely, what?

I don't disagree that women's voices are,historically less heard, see my previous posts. But I don't understand what it is OP wants - specifically!

I wonder whether you are expecting something a little too specialized from these particular courses. I can't claim to know much about the history of New York but I do about the history of Western Classical Music and, if the course on that was meant to be a general survey of the important figures, schools of thought, works etc. then I'm afraid you would expect it to focus almost exclusively on men. There is no getting round the fact that the people who rose to prominence were almost exclusively male because of attitudes in their times. There were women who were active in various ways - from back in the 12th Century with Hildegard of Bingen to Mozart's sister Nannerl (possibly as talented as her brother in some ways) to Schumann's wife, Clara. Their work is, to some extent, documented and interesting but a specialized area which relates to the way things were for them - it is probably not a decision of the lecturers to relegate them from the syllabus but more the way history actually was. Unless somebody has evidence that I'm not aware of (not impossible) you can't start claiming that the first major symphony or string quartet composer was a woman when it was Haydn. However, at an appropriate point, you may well find it rewarding and interesting focus on one or more women in a particular field if that is what interests you.

How - reading list is great and exciting and very intense. In fact I need to crack on.

I know there is existing research and more coming out all the time on this subject. However, I do not believe it should be niche or an off course extra. The given role or lack of a role for 50% of the population of the time is important to include imo.

Must run now. Many thanks to all. Great to refine thoughts on Mumsnet.

OK OurBlanche, it's difficult to do a definite checklist obviously when we're talking about academia generally, which ranges over zillions over subjects, plus I am not an academic.

But for starters:

• Ensure that when considering what "a group" was doing, you consider and talk about both men and women in that group, not just men*
• Actively search out and make students aware of women's voices where possible to illustrate this (and be creative, for example if there weren't any female diarists in the era you're teaching, look at women's creative writing or biographies or newspaper accounts etc from that era that says something about their lives)
• Talk about at least some high profile women in the field/era you're teaching, even if they're not the very highest profile people in that field/era
• Don't treat women as if all their experiences/creative output/ideas were the same because they all have vaginas - they can disagree with each other and don't necessarily have much in common. It may well be more profitable to compare a man and a woman than two women.
• If you're teaching a subject where women's contribution was severely limited, or hasn't been recorded, teach why that might be. It's not too obvious to say "we don't have a lot of good examples of female classical musicians because women performing in public was looked on as unacceptable" or whatever.

*As a bonus, try to make it clear when you mean "just men", for example instead of "Athenians were allowed to vote", say "Athenian men were allowed to vote".

And sorry to be posting all over the thread but can I say, finding a female professor to talk to, or raising it with other students is all very well - but why not just come out and ask the professor. Better still, email them making the points, and maybe copy in your university women's officer (or forward it to them).

StVincent nice list!

Ensure that when considering what "a group" was doing, you consider and talk about both men and women in that group, not just men That would be normal, dependent on the nature of the group. No point in looking for women in the history of prelates/popes etc - no..wait!!!! POPE JOAN was real!

Actively search out and make students aware of women's voices where possible to illustrate this (and be creative, for example if there weren't any female diarists in the era you're teaching, look at women's creative writing or biographies or newspaper accounts etc from that era that says something about their lives) Mmm! You see lecturers/Professors will have their own areas of interest and may be teaching a broader, more simple aspect of the topic. The active searching is what the student is there to do! Newspapers??? May not have existed. Literacy levels would preclude much diarising, form men and women. The information may not be so obvious and, again, is what the student is there to learn to research, maybe.

Talk about at least some high profile women in the field/era you're teaching, even if they're not the very highest profile people in that field/era I agree, but the details, lesser known people are what the student is supposed to research. A lecture sets up the broad issues, the student input can be focussed as the individual student wishes... if they can be bothered to do more taxing research.

Don't treat women as if all their experiences/creative output/ideas were the same because they all have vaginas - they can disagree with each other and don't necessarily have much in common. It may well be more profitable to compare a man and a woman than two women. No idea what this has to do with what the OP posted... or academia in general!

If you're teaching a subject where women's contribution was severely limited, or hasn't been recorded, teach why that might be. It's not too obvious to say "we don't have a lot of good examples of female classical musicians because women performing in public was looked on as unacceptable" or whatever. Nor is it too difficult for a student having chosen the subject to study at degree level to already have that knowledge! Again, if the individual student wants to focus on women in any era/topic they are free to do so in many ways.

At the root of it, the student is there to do the research. If they spot a gap, a real one, they are supposed to enquire, research that gap, incorporate it into their knowledge, maybe make it their specialist subject... Accepting that there is a gap and that you, as an individual, may need to compete an undergraduate degree a masters and go on to do new research, adding to any 'canon, is surely the point of higher education.

And sorry to be posting all over the thread don't apologise, it's interesting.

As for Athenians, making that point would be redundant at degree level... it is a strictly patriarchal society wherein women are wives and mothers. That would be a 'grass is green' statement to make, at degree level.

Or has ancient history been removed from GCSE and A level history?

TBH I was talking about courses generally, not just university courses, and definitely not saying that the student should just sit on their arse and have everything fed to them.

BUT that is different from lecturers/professors/teachers only including texts by men, study of individual men, and accounts of men's lives. I don't think teachers (general term) should be able to get away with just saying they're only going to talk about men, and if the student wants to know about women, they can fucking go and read up.

To be honest OurBlanche for an academic you come across as very complacent and unquestioning, very satisfied with the status quo.

Clarinet - see I agree re Western Art Music. But don't you think, that in 3 to 4 hundred years some woman somewhere may have written something? Especially the monied classes who spend large amounts of their days studying music.
There is no record of it as yet, that we know of. But it seems extremely unlikely that no woman in that time composed anything.
So, in my opinion, in that course, spend a few minutes musing on this.
If we don't refer to it, or reflect on it, if we just brush over it then we end up where we are today. I mean how many conductors are female? In the world? 5 or 10. Crazy number. There are still orchestras who do not allow women. In 2016. How many female composers?
My though is that by just studying the men, without any formal required thinking as to the paupacy of women then it somehow perpetuates things. i am a very bad writer.

OurBlanche - you're thinking very specifically about university courses where the student would already have learnt that subject for 13 years of school. 1) Lots of courses aren't like that, even at university. 2) I was trying to be as broad as possible, considering different levels of education. 3) Even if they have studied the subject (e.g. "history") for 13 years, it doesn't mean they'll have studied that bit of it (e.g. history of industrial reform in the US) ever in their lives before.

And yeah, my daughter has done history at GCSE and Alevel without touching on ancient history.

"It is a strictly patriarchal society wherein women are wives and mothers."

See - you managed it! Saying that at some point during a course wouldn't actually kill a teacher, especially if it's likely that not all students have studied in this specific field before. Rather than the weird "pretend women just didn't exist" thing.

Also can I just say, your nitpicking about "newspapers might not have existed in all spaces and times" - yes, thanks mate, I am aware of that, bit patronising. It was a list of potential examples that, as I said at the beginning, is tricky when talking about academia as a whole.

Are you doing free online MOOCs? In which case there are hundreds to choose from and I'm not sure people providing the free courses will have much time to adapt and respond to your criticism. It's something to mention in the course feedback, then choose more carefully next time.

Solomon - no, teh UNI is of the bricks and mortar kind!

Sorry *the

how I wouldn't bother asking what "a few classes" means.

No doubt the OP would be snarky with you as well.

Sort of presumed she meant "a few different modules in one course" i.e. traditional English uni model, or "a few different courses that tot up to a degree" i.e. US type model (and I think possibly some Scottish universities?)

I think you make a very good point OP

Definitely mention in module feedback (I don't know about you but as a student I am constantly being asked for feedback of some form or another)

One or more of the course team may be keen to include what you describe, and your comments could add to the evidence that it should be included (I also work in a university - student satisfaction mega buzzwords)

It would be too late for you at that stage of course, but you can explore further for yourself or with tutor guidance as others have said in the meantime

TinklyLittleLaugh, that's interesting that you saw no women at all in your O-level, because my own O-level in British Economic & Social History 1750-1914 had substantial amounts about women.

We covered the change of industries like spinning from women's cottage industry to mill-based work, women working at the pit-head, the fact that women were excluded from the 1832 Reform Act and indeed from the Chartists' demands. The Factory Acts specified different conditions for men & women, so it's impossible to cover them without discussing women's work.

I learnt about Elizabeth Gaskell and Elizabeth Fry as social reformers, about the women among others killed at Peterloo, and about Emily Davison, Suffragists and Suffragettes.

I remember Miss Buss & Miss Beale, pioneers in womens' education, and the foundation of Girton College, Cambridge.

Even unimportant things like James Watt claiming his mother's kettle was the inspiration for steam power.

Those are just off the top of my head. Women were ever-present in our history lessons, even when denied centre-stage.

Yes St. Vincent that is it.

Hag - am trying to work it through. I find if I try to present something I feel passionate about I can get heated.

Mumsnet is marvelous in that way. It can be trashed out "safely " and one can be ready for the counter arguments!

Really jealous of your course SurelyYou'reJoking - goes to show how much is down to individual teachers.