Mutable meanings: gender equality in education and international rights frameworks

Abstract

Gender equality in education has considerable prominence in a wide range of international treaties and declarations, encompassing those concerned with human rights, gender equality, the expansion of education and the reduction of poverty. Despite this, however, it has not been easy to realise gender equality in education at the national and local level in many countries. Although statistics on rising numbers of girls and boys enrolling in school and the improvements in attainment by many girls suggest large steps towards equality, these often mask persistent inequalities in which gender features prominently. This article examines why the international frameworks relating to gender equality in education are so difficult to realise. The discussion draws mainly on data collected from a three year research project in Kenya and South Africa on how international frameworks concerned with poverty, gender equality and education were negotiated in a range of local settings.

A Longitudinal Study of Equity-Oriented STEM-Rich Making Among Youth From Historically Marginalized Communities

“…This integration of community knowledge and practice with STEM making was viewed as necessary for projects to be successful. Here, the role of digging more deeply into STEM took on local significance rather than reflecting a school and/or white male culture, reflecting modes of dynamic learning (Leander et al, 2010) and intersectionality (Unterhalther, 2012).…”

“…Intersectionality not only highlights the tangled webs of oppression, but also urges the formation of dynamic alliances toward social transformation, once these interconnecting webs can be named, identified, and understood. Therefore, beyond delineating the complexity of systemic oppressive forces, a social transformative goal underlies intersectionality (Unterhalther, 2012).…”

Locating inclusion within the OECD’s assessment of global competence: An inclusive future through PISA 2018?

“…Conceptualizing inclusion as overcoming barriers to access and participation has led to the consideration of additional exclusionary factors such as wealth, geography and language of instruction (Shaeffer, 2019). As a broader politic of inclusion is embedded within academic literature and national and international understandings of inclusive education, exclusionary factors often intersect (Miles and Singal, 2010;Unterhalter, 2012). As an organization with the intent to promote economic development, where does an engagement with inclusion fit within the OECD's mandate?…”

Girls’ education: The power of policy discourse

“…The CRC supports access to schooling for all children, including girls, CEDAW addresses discrimination and violence against women, and ICESCR prioritizes equality in a range of life domains (work, education, etc.). Unterhalter (2012) argues that, while these treaties are 'a tighter form of legal agreement between states, [there is] less detail [about] aspects of educational organization . .…”