Search results

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between theory and history, or more specifically the role and use of theory in the field of history of education. It will explore the following questions: What is theory, and what is it for? How do historians and, in particular, historians of education construe and use theory? And how do they respond to openly theoretical work? The author poses these questions in light of ongoing discussions in the field of history of education regarding the role, relevance, and utility of theory in historical research, analysis, and narratives.

The explicit use of theory in historical research is not altogether new, tracing an intellectual genealogy since the mid-1800s when disciplinary boundaries among academic fields were not so rigidly defined, developed and regulated. The paper analyzes three books that are geographically located in North America (USA), Australia, Europe (Great Britain) and Asia (India), thereby offering a transnational view of the use of theory in history of education. It also examines how historians of education respond to explicitly theoretical work by analyzing, as a case study, a 2011 special issue in History of Education Quarterly.

First, the paper delineates theory as a multidimensional concept and practice with varying and competing meanings and interpretations. Second, it examines three book-length historical studies of education that employ theoretical frameworks drawing from cultural, feminist poststructuralist and postcolonial approaches. The author’s analysis of these manuscripts reveals that historians of education who explicitly engage with theory pursue their research in reflexive, disruptive and generative modes. Lastly, it utilizes a recent scholarly exchange as a case study of how some historians of education respond to theoretically informed work. It highlights three lenses – reading with insistence, for resistance, and beyond – to understand the responses to the author’s paper on Foucault and poststructuralism.

Setting theory to work has a fundamentally transformative role to play in our thinking, writing and teaching as scholars, educators and students and in the productive re-imagining of history of education.

Examines the issue of unobtrusive power in organizations by applying a poststructuralist lens to Lukes′ third dimension of power in order to highlight the relationship between ideology, discourse and organizational experience. After identifying the advantages and limitations of this perspective, offers suggestions on how a poststructuralist view of power can inform organizational practice.

After presenting an “origin story” for qualitative poststructuralism and arts-based research, I write of Norman Denzin's unique contributions to those endeavors. These include his charisma, organizational skills, generous spirit, and commitment to social justice. I briefly review the contributions of his writing, editorships, sponsorship of the International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, and focus on First Nations.

Purpose—The notion of organizations as gendered is not new, yet critical gaps in the understanding of the processes responsible for the creation and maintenance of these gendered organizations still exist. Within the existing breadth and depth of feminist organizational scholarship, an increasing number of researchers have been drawn to Joan Acker’s notion of the “gendered substructure” as one of the more promising frameworks for analysis of the gendering of organizations. In this chapter, the authors seek to develop an analysis of Acker’s gendered substructure through, and reflection on, its application.

Design/methodology/approach—Acker’s framework of gendering processes is explored through a case study of the gendering of a single organization over time—Pan American World Airways (Pan Am). The authors’ “reading” of the archival materials was informed by a combination of feminist poststructuralism, critical discourse analysis, and critical hermeneutics.

Findings—Through an exploration of the roots of Acker’s framework and its application to a case study of a single organization over time (Pan Am), the chapter contends that its greatest potential lies in examining the four process sets—division of labor, workplace culture, social interactions, and (self) reflection—through a fifth process of “organizational logic” that is seen as temporal and contextual. Drawing on poststructuralist feminist theory, it argues that organizational logic can be viewed through analyses of organizational, and organizationally based, discourses.

Originality/value—The chapter argues that the (widely recognized) heuristic value of Joan Acker’s “gendered substructure” has not been realized due to inconsistencies in its interpretation and application. This study engages Acker’s framework in its entirety, as gendering processes do not exist in silos and are likely more interdependent than typically credited. The chapter looks at the dynamics of, and between the five sets of, gendering processes.

The authors sought to examine how hegemonic masculinity and sexism functioned in a storied, historic corporation, a test of MAnne's (2017) claim that misogyny is a structural phenomenon rather than being about anger and hatred of individual men.

This study was an archaeological excavation of discourse in a well-documented employment relationship. The researchers were informed by feminist poststructuralism and drew on critical discourse analysis of labour arbitration and media from the case of a woman, twice wrongfully dismissed.

The authors concluded that the employer was the site of hegemonic masculinity, which led to a train conductor being repeatedly targeted and demeaned in a bad faith and discriminatory manner for disrupting the conductor’s employer's patriarchal strictures. The authors found that misogyny shaped the conductors’s experience as a repeated pattern of abuse, a gendered feature of a patriarchal organisation, and a coercive matter of maintaining the conductor’s subordination. The authors also found that the male arbitrator in the conductor’s second dismissal arbitration became complicit in misogyny by penalising the conductor for acts of resistance, giving the employer what the employer wanted, to purge the conductor for violating the patriarchal norms.

The authors traced how a historic corporation demonstrated vulnerability to the resistance of a lone female worker, who faced discriminatory, disturbing and bad faith managerial behaviour in the creation of the conductor’s own meaning and resistant identity. The authors concluded that evidence of the regulation of employee relations, such as the decisions of arbitrators, can reveal the processes and outcomes of work under hegemonic masculinity, sexism and misogyny.

The notion of organizations as gendered is not new yet critical gaps in the understanding of the processes responsible for the creation and maintenance of these gendered organizations still exist. Within the existing breadth and depth of feminist organizational scholarship an increasing number of researchers have been drawn to Joan Acker's notion of the “gendered substructure” as one of the more promising frameworks for analysis of the gendering of organizations. In this paper the authors seek to develop an analysis of Acker's gendered substructure through, and reflection on, its application.

Acker's framework of gendering processes is explored through a case study of the gendering of a single organization over time – Pan American World Airways (Pan Am). The authors' “reading” of the archival materials was informed by a combination of feminist poststructuralism, critical discourse analysis and critical hermeneutics.

Through an exploration of the roots of Acker's framework and its application to a case study of a single organization over time (Pan Am), the paper contends that its greatest potential lies in examining the four process sets – division of labor, workplace culture, social interactions and (self) reflection – through a fifth process of “organizational logic” that is seen as temporal and contextual. Drawing on poststructuralist feminist theory, it argues that organizational logic can be viewed through analyses of organizational, and organizationally based, discourses.

The paper argues that the (widely recognized) heuristic value of Joan Acker's “gendered substructure” has not been realized due to inconsistencies in its interpretation and application. This study engages Acker's framework in its entirety, as gendering processes do not exist in silos and are likely more interdependent than typically credited. The paper looks at the dynamics of, and between the five sets of, gendering processes.