Advertisement

Gender, Religion, and the Work of Homeschooling

  • Michael W. AppleEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter, I examine the ways in which the claim to subaltern status has led to a partial withdrawal from state-run institutions and to a practice of schooling that is meant to equip the children of authoritarian populist conservative religious parents both with an armor to defend what these groups believe is their threatened culture and with a set of skills and values that will change the world so that it reflects the conservative religious commitments that are so central to their lives. I focus on the ways in which new technologies such as the Internet have become essential resources in what authoritarian populists see as a counter-hegemonic struggle against secular humanism and a world that no longer “listens to God’s word”. In fact, it is becoming increasingly clear that new technologies such as the Internet actually enable the formation and growth of such religious movements and enhance their ability to challenge secularity. Much of my discussion centers around the place of gender in these movements since conservative women are key actors here and have multiple identities within them—simultaneously able to claim subaltern status based on the history of dominant gender regimes and having dominant status given their positioning in relationship to other oppressed groups.

Keywords

Social Movement Charter School Emotional Labor Religious Movement Secular Schooling 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

References

  1. Amenta, E., & Young, M. P. (1999). Making an impact: Conceptual and methodological implications of the collective goods criterion. In M. Guigni, D. McAdam, & C. Tilly (Eds.), How social movements matter (pp. 22–41). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  2. Andre-Bechely, L. (2005). Could it be otherwise? Parents and the inequalities of public school choice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Apple, M. W. (2006). Educating the “right” way: Markets, standards, god, and inequality (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Apple, M. W., et al. (2003). The state and the politics of knowledge. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bacchetta, P., & Power, M. (2002). Introduction. In P. Baccetta & M. Power (Eds.), Right-wing women (pp. 1–15). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Bernstein, B. (1977). Class, codes, and control (Volume 3) (2nd ed.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  7. Binder, A. (2002). Contentious curricula. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Boris, E. (1993). The power of motherhood: Black and white activist women redefine the “political”. In S. Koven & S. Michel (Eds.), Mothers of a new world (pp. 213–245). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Brasher, B. (1998). Godly women. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bromley, H., & Apple, M. W. (Eds.). (1998). Education/technology/power. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  11. Castells, M. (1996). The rise of network society (Vol. 1). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  13. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. du Toit, M. (2002). In P. Bacchetta & M. Power (Eds.), Right-wing women (pp. 57–70). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Ellin, A. (2006, May 25). Physical culture: Home schoolers learn ABC’s of keeping fit. The New York Times.Google Scholar
  16. Enders, V. (2002). And we ate up the world. In P. Bacchetta & M. Power (Eds.), Right-wing women (pp. 85–98). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Fraser, N. (1989). Unruly practices. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  18. Giugni, M. (1999). How social movements matter: Past research, present problems, and future developments. In M. Giugni, D. McAdam, & C. Tilly (Eds.), How social movements matter (pp. xiii–xxxiii). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  19. Godwin, M. (2003). Cyber rights. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. Gottlieb, J. (2002). Female ‘fanatics’. In P. Bacchetta & M. Power (Eds.), Right-wing women (pp. 29–41). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Green, J. (2000). The Christian right and 1998 elections. In J. Green, M. Rozell, & C. Wilcox (Eds.), Prayers in the precincts (pp. 1–19). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Green, J., Rozell, M., & Wilcox, C. (Eds.). (2000). Prayers in the precincts. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Griffith, A., & Smith, D. (2005). Mothering for schooling. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Gross, J. (2003, November 10). Unhappy in class, more are learning at home. The New York Times.Google Scholar
  25. Hakken, D. (1999). Cyborgs@Cyberspace. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Hardisty, J. (1999). Mobilizing resentment. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
  27. Huerta, L. (2000). Losing public accountability: A home schooling charter. In B. Fuller (Ed.), Inside Charter Schools (pp. 177–202). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Jordan, T. (1999). Cyberpower. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kessler-Harris, A. (2001). In pursuit of equity. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Koven, S., & Michel, S. (1993). Introduction: ‘Mother worlds’. In S. Koven & S. Michel (Eds.), Mothers of a new world (pp. 1–42). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Ladd-Taylor, M. (1994). Mother-work. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  32. McAdam, D. (1999). The biographical impact of activism. In M. Giugni, D. McAdam, & C. Tilly (Eds.), How social movements matter (pp. 119–146). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  33. Meyer, D. S. (1999). How the cold war was really won: The effects of the antinuclear movements of the 1980s. In M. Giugni, D. McAdam, & C. Tilly (Eds.), How social movements matter (pp. 182–203). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  34. Moore, K. (1999). Political protest and institutional change. In M. Giugni, D. McAdam, & C. Tilly (Eds.), How social movements matter (pp. 97–115). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  35. Princiotta, D., Bielick, S., & Chapman, C. (2006). Homeschooling in the United States: 2003. Washington, DC: National center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education.Google Scholar
  36. Ray, B. (2005). Worldwide guide to homeschooling. Nashville: Broadman and Holman.Google Scholar
  37. Rosin, H. (2005, June 27). God and country. The New Yorker, 44–49.Google Scholar
  38. Rozell, M., & Wilcox, C. (1996). Second coming. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Sampson, Z. C. (2005, December 11). Home schools are becoming more popular among blacks. The New York Times.Google Scholar
  40. Schwartz Cowan, R. (1983). More work for mother. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  41. Slevin, J. (2000). The internet and society. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  42. Smith, C. (1998). American evangelicalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  43. Stambach, A., & David, M. (2005). Feminist theory and educational policy: How gender has been ‘involved’ in family school choice debates. Signs, 30(2 (Winter)), 1633–1658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stevens, M. (2001). Kingdom of children. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Strasser, S. (1982). Never done. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  46. Wilcox, C., & Rozell, M. (2000). Conclusion: The Christian right in campaign ’98. In J. Green, M. Rozell, & C. Wilcox (Eds.), Prayers in the precincts (pp. 287–297). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Curriculum and Instruction and Educational Policy StudiesUniversity of WisconsinWisconsinUSA
  2. 2.Educational Policy StudiesEast China Normal UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations