‘I can be powerful as an individual agent’: Experiences of recently homeless women in an enabling program, transformative pedagogies and spaces of empowerment in higher education

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Aug 21, 2019
Keywords:
enabling education critical teaching framework women’s homelessness feminist pedagogies pedagogies of care

Main Article Content

Sarah Kate Hattam
University of South Australia
Snjezana Bilic
University of South Australia

Abstract

This paper reports on an action research project investigating how enabling education has the potential to empower women who have recently been homeless. The authors, both enabling practitioners and sociologists, taught a seven week intensive global sociology course to 12 women who were engaged with a women’s homeless shelter, four of whom were interviewed about their course experience. The conceptual tools we utilised to analyse the responses given by the women about their experiences are Ira Shor’s (1992) critical teaching framework, feminist pedagogies and specific elements of feminist poststructuralist theory, in discourse theory and subjectivity. The discussion details the application of pedagogical approaches that emphasise agency of the students. The study shows that providing opportunities for vulnerable and marginalised students to apply a ‘sociological imagination’ (Mills, 1959) to the study of global society can have a ‘liberating’ effect (Shor, 1992). Focusing on implementing feminist pedagogies offers female students an inclusive space to explore questions of power, identity and difference that transcends borders. Significantly, applying a critical pedagogical (Shor, 1992) approach contributed to students choosing to engage in further higher education and shift their perception of their own ‘capabilities’ (Burke, Bennett, Burgess, Gray, & Southgate, 2016). Emphasising the affirmative aspects of critical pedagogy, the paper adopts a critical lens by highlighting the discomfort produced by the ‘democratic-dialogic’ approach for some of the women in the course.

Article Details

How to Cite
Hattam, S. K., & Bilic, S. (2019). ‘I can be powerful as an individual agent’: Experiences of recently homeless women in an enabling program, transformative pedagogies and spaces of empowerment in higher education. Access: Critical Explorations of Equity in Higher Education, 6(1), 65–79. Retrieved from https://novaojs.newcastle.edu.au/ceehe/index.php/iswp/article/view/115
Issue
Vol. 6 No. 1 (2019)
Section
Research Paper
Copyright is retained by the author.

References

ABS. (2018). Census reveals a rise in the rate of homelessness in Australia. Media Release, 14 March. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/lookup/

0Media%20Release12016

AIHW. (2012). Specialist Homeless Services Data Collection March Quarter 2012. Retrieved from https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/housing-assistance/specialist-homelessness-services-collection-march/contents/table-of-contents

Ahmed, S. (2004). The cultural politics of emotion. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.

Andrewartha, L., & Harvey, A. (2014). Willing and enabled: The academic outcomes of a tertiary enabling program in regional Australia. Australian Journal of Adult Learning,

(1), 50-68.

Bennett, A., Motta, S. C., Hamilton, E., Burgess, C., Relf, B., Gray, K., Leroy-Dyer, S., & Albright, J. (2016). Enabling Pedagogies: A participatory conceptual mapping of practices at the University of Newcastle, Australia. Report submitted to the Centre of Excellence for Equity in Higher Education (CEEHE), University of Newcastle, Australia.

Biederman, D., & Forlan, N. (2016). Desired Destinations of Homeless Women: Realizing Aspirations within the Context of Homelessness. Creative Nursing, 22(3), 196-203.

Burke, P. J. (2012). The right to higher education: beyond widening participation. Routledge: Milton Park and New York.

Burke, P. J. (2013). The right to higher education: neoliberalism, gender and professional mis/recognition, International Studies in Sociology of Education, 23(2), 107-126.

Burke, P. J. (2017). Difference in higher education pedagogies: gender, emotion and shame, Gender and Education, 29(4), 430-444.

Burke, P. J., Bennett, A., Burgess, C., Gray, K., & Southgate, E. (2016). Capability, Belonging and Equity in Higher Education: Developing inclusive approaches. Report submitted to the Centre of Excellence for Equity in Higher Education (CEEHE), University of Newcastle, Australia.

Burke, P. J., & Crozier, G. (2013). Teaching inclusively: changing pedagogical spaces. Report submitted to the Centre of Excellence for Equity in Higher Education (CEEHE), University of Newcastle, Australia.

Burke, P. J., Crozier G., & Misiaszek, L. (2017). Changing Pedagogical Spaces in Higher Education: Diversities, Inequalities and Misrecognition. London: Routledge.

Commonwealth of Australia. (2008). Review of Australian Higher Education. Final Report. Retrieved from https://www.mq.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/135310/bradley

_review_of_australian_higher_education.pdf

Cotterill, P. (1992). Interviewing Women: Issues of Friendship, Vulnerability, and Power. Women's Studies International Forum, 15(5/6), 593-606.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Foucault, M. (1972). The archeology of knowledge. London: Routledge.

Franzway, S., Sharp, R., Mills, J., & Gill, J. (2009). Engineering Ignorance: The Problem of Gender Equity in Engineering. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, 30(1), 89-106.

Freire, P. (1970). The pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: The Continuum International Publishing Group.

Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Seabury.

Hall, S. (1997). Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices. Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University.

Hattam, R., Shacklock, G., & Smyth, J. (1997). Towards a Practice of Critical Teaching about Teachers’ Work. Teaching in Higher Education, 2(3), 225-241.

Hattam, S., Stokes, J., & Ulpen, T. (2018). Should I stay or should I go? Understanding student subjectivity, institutional discourse and the role enabling academics can play in empowering students within the system. International Journal of Educational Organisation and Leadership, 25(1-2), 1-14.

Homelessness Organisation. (2013). Homelessness and Women. Fact-sheet. Retrieved from https://www.homelessnessaustralia.org.au/sites/homelessnessaus/files/2017-07/Homelessness_and_Women.pdf

Johnson, B. (2005). Overcoming ‘Doom and Gloom’: Empowering Students in Courses on Social Problems, Injustice, and Inequality. Teaching Sociology, 33(1), 44-58.

Lather, P. (1992). Critical Frames in Educational Research: Feminist and Post-structural Perspectives. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 87-99.

Malterud, K. (2001). Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet, 358(9280), 483–88.

Merriam, S. B., Johnson-Bailey, J., Lee, M. Y., Kee, Y., Ntseane, G., & Muhamad, M. (2001). Power and positionality: negotiating insider/outsider status within and across cultures. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 20(5), 405-416.

Mills, C. W. (1959). The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.

Motta, S., & Bennett, A. (2018). Pedagogies of care, care-full epistemological practice and ‘other’ caring subjectivities in enabling education. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(5), 631-646.

Muldoon, R. (2011). Tertiary Enabling Education: Removing Barriers to Higher Education. In P. Cunningham and N. Fretwell (Eds.), Europe’s future: Citizenship in a changing world (pp. 288–297), London: CiCe.

Oakley, A. (1981), Interviewing women: A contradiction in terms. In H. Robert (Ed.), Doing Feminist Research (pp. 30-61), London and New York: Routledge.

O’Connor P., Carvalho T., Vabø A., Cardoso S. (2015) Gender in Higher Education: A Critical Review. In J. Huisman, H. de Boer, D. D. Dill and M. Souto-Otero (Eds.), The Palgrave International Handbook of Higher Education Policy and Governance (pp. 569-584), London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Olesen, V. L. (2000). Feminisms and qualitative research at and into the millennium. In N. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 215-255), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Reinharz, S. (1992). Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press.

Rivera, L. (2008). Laboring to Learn: Women's Literacy and Poverty in the Post-welfare Era. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Shor, I. (1992). Empowering Education: Critical Teaching for Social Change. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Shor, I., & Freire, P. (1987). A pedagogy for liberation: Dialogues on transforming education. Westport, CT: Bergin-Garvey.

Sixsmith, J., Boneham, M., & Goldring, J. E. (2003). Accessing the community: Gaining insider perspectives from the outside. Qualitative Health Research, 13(4), 578-589.

Smyth, J., & Hattam, R. (2004). Dropping out, drifting off, being excluded: Becoming something without school. New York: Peter Lang.

Stokes, J. (2014). New students and enabling pedagogies: Supporting students from diverse backgrounds through a university enabling program. The International Journal of Diversity in Education, 13, 115-124.

UniSA. (2009). Teaching for Success at UniSA, Teaching Innovation Unit.

Wallowitz, L. (Ed.) (2015). Critical Literacy as Resistance: Teaching for Social Justice Across the Secondary Curriculum. New York: Peter Lang.

Weedon, C. (1987). Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory. London: Blackwell Publishers.

Willis, E. (2011). The sociological quest: An introduction to the study of life. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Zembylas, M. (2015). ‘Pedagogy of discomfort’ and its ethical implications: the tensions of ethical violence in social justice education. Ethics and Education, 10(4), 163-174.

Zufferey, C. (2014). Questioning Representations of Homelessness in the Australian Print Media. Australian Social Work, 67(4), 525-536.