Cette thèse applique le concept analytique d’ « inégalité intersectionnelle des genres » à l’analyse des implications du développement du secteur privé du care sur les inégalités structurelles fondées sur le genre, la classe et la race en France et en Allemagne. Je pose la question suivante : les politiques publiques régissant le secteur du care renforcent-elles les inégalités intersectionnelles par leur manque de compréhension des phénomènes de discrimination intersectionnelle ? Dans quelle mesure les politiques publiques dans les domaines de l’immigration, de l’emploi, de la famille et de l’égalité professionnelle entre hommes et femmes prennent-elles en compte l’intersection des désavantages structurels ? J’aborde la notion d’ « égalité des genres » d’un point de vue intersectionnel dans le sens où la catégorie « femme » est envisagée comme un groupe hétérogène et non universel. Les inégalités au sein de cette catégorie sont donc au centre de l’attention. Le transfert du travail reproductif des femmes employées sur le marché du travail formel à d’autres femmes en situation marginale pose des questions de hiérarchie basée sur la classe et sur la race à l’intérieur de la catégorie ‘femmes’. Ma problématique pourrait donc être reformulée comme suit : Comment les politiques promouvant le développement des services de care privés influencent-elles l’égalité entre les hommes et les femmes, et l’égalité entre les femmes ? Une analyse approfondie des politiques discursives et des cadres politiques liés aux problèmes du care et de l’égalité des genres a permis de comprendre les diverses représentations et constructions de ces questions politiques. La recherche conclut que les divers cadres discursifs des problèmes politiques de l’égalité des genres, de l’immigration et de l’emploi dans le secteur du care ont un impact direct sur la formulation des politiques publiques se rapportant au travail du care, ce qui perpétue un processus de discrimination que je décrit en conceptualise comme inégalité intersectionnelle des genres. / This dissertation applies the analytical concept of “intersectional gender inequality” to the analysis of the implications of the development of private care for gender, class and racial structural inequalities in France and Germany. I ask: how do public policies pertaining to social care – in their current formulation – reinforce intersectional inequalities because of their disregard or lack of understanding of intersectional discrimination? To what extent do migration, labor market, family, and gender equality policies frame and address intersectional disadvantage? The transfer of reproductive work from women employed on the formal labor market to other marginalized women poses questions of hierarchy based on racism and classism within the group “women.” My research question could be reformulated as: How do policies promoting the development of personal care services influence equality between men and women, and equality between women? I undertook an in-depth analysis of the intricate relationships between white supremacy, class exploitation and patriarchy and examined how these systems of domination impact on gender inequality. The analysis of discursive politics and policy frames related to the issue of care and gender equality allowed an understanding of the various representations and constructions of the political issues and of the people affected by it.The discourses developed in relation to the above-mentioned policies reflect particular representations of the interrelated problems of gender inequality, labor shortages in the care sector, and immigration, as well as the solutions brought forward to solve them. Using critical frame analysis, this dissertation addresses the intersectional representation (or lack thereof) of racialized women in policies, laws and discourses pertaining to social care. Drawing from this, the specific structural discrimination of racialized women on the labor market will be analyzed.The research reveals that the discursive framing of the policy issues of gender inequality, immigration and employment in care impact on the formulation of policies pertaining to care work, which in turn sustain a discrimination pattern that I describe and conceptualize as intersectional gender inequality.

No description available.

No description available.

This work focuses on Chican@ identity in academia and uses CRT counterstory to address topics of cultural displacement, assimilation, the American Dream, and ethnic studies. This research considers where the field of rhetoric and composition currently stands in terms of preparedness to serve a growing Chican@ undergraduate and graduate student population. Through counterstory, I offer strategies that more effectively serve students from non-traditional backgrounds in various spaces and practices such as the composition classroom, faculty mentoring, and programmatic requirements such as second language proficiency exams. Since rhetoric and composition can confront structurally and historically specific racisms--e.g., segregation, lack of access for the racial minority to higher education, ethnocentric curricula--embedded in our field, then we, as teachers, students, and administrators, can strategize ways to achieve social justice in academia for historically marginalized groups. My dissertation is focused on Chican@ undergraduate and graduate students because this is the fastest growing population in the academy and is a group with which I feel I can draw upon my cultural intuition; however, the critical race theoretical, pedagogical, and methodological strategies I make use of in my project can be adapted to assist other historically marginalized groups in academia.

The issue of special education in the United States has been a contentious issue, at best, for the past 40 years. In Ontario, to a lesser extent, there have been issues of equal access to education for minoritized and racialized students. Special education in the Toronto area has not been without its issues surrounding parental advocacy, the use of assessments, and disproportionate number of English Language Learners in special education. This project examines how racialized and minoritized families understand special education practices and policies, specifically within the Toronto, York, Peel, and Halton Regions. The investigation is informed by nine interviews with students in grades 7 to 12, their respective mothers, and five special education administrators and educators. Students and parents identified themselves as Black, Latino/a, and South Asian. Within these categories, parents identified themselves as Somali, Trinidadian, Jamaican, and Punjabi-Sikh. Students were identified with a range of disabilities including learning, behavioural, and/or intellectual. This research focuses on ways to interrogate and examine the experiences of minoritized students and their parents by bringing forward otherwise silenced voices and understanding what it means to “speak out” against the process of identification and placement in special education. The findings of this investigation suggest a disconnect how policies and practices are implemented, and how, parents’ rights are understood. In particular, policies are inconsistently applied and are subject to the interpretation of educators and administrators, especially in relation to parental involvement and how much information should be released to families. The issue of language acquisition being read as a disability was also a noted concern. This investigation points to implications for teacher education programs, gaps in parental advocacy and notions of parental participation within schools, and re-examining special education assessments, practices, and policies.

The issue of special education in the United States has been a contentious issue, at best, for the past 40 years. In Ontario, to a lesser extent, there have been issues of equal access to education for minoritized and racialized students. Special education in the Toronto area has not been without its issues surrounding parental advocacy, the use of assessments, and disproportionate number of English Language Learners in special education. This project examines how racialized and minoritized families understand special education practices and policies, specifically within the Toronto, York, Peel, and Halton Regions. The investigation is informed by nine interviews with students in grades 7 to 12, their respective mothers, and five special education administrators and educators. Students and parents identified themselves as Black, Latino/a, and South Asian. Within these categories, parents identified themselves as Somali, Trinidadian, Jamaican, and Punjabi-Sikh. Students were identified with a range of disabilities including learning, behavioural, and/or intellectual. This research focuses on ways to interrogate and examine the experiences of minoritized students and their parents by bringing forward otherwise silenced voices and understanding what it means to “speak out” against the process of identification and placement in special education. The findings of this investigation suggest a disconnect how policies and practices are implemented, and how, parents’ rights are understood. In particular, policies are inconsistently applied and are subject to the interpretation of educators and administrators, especially in relation to parental involvement and how much information should be released to families. The issue of language acquisition being read as a disability was also a noted concern. This investigation points to implications for teacher education programs, gaps in parental advocacy and notions of parental participation within schools, and re-examining special education assessments, practices, and policies.

Black girls continue to suffer from inequitable treatment in schools resulting in disparate academic and social outcomes. While deficit ideologists have continued to attribute outcomes to cultural deficiencies within the Black community, research has found various systemic issues of racism and sexism seriously affecting Black girls in schools. However, the experiences of this population remain under or uninvestigated. When Black girls’ experiences in school are investigated, they are commonly framed as a group in need of saving and their perspectives and voices eliminated from the work. Further, this group is often homogenized and all their experiences limited to those of the inner-city or urban environments. Using a critical raced-gendered epistemology, grounded in critical race theory and Black feminism/womanism, this qualitative interview study explores Black high school girls’ experiences in a predominately White suburban public school in the southeast. Through the method of storytelling that includes constructing counter narratives, five girls (ages 14-16) relay their experiences in this predominately White suburban educational space. Parent reflections as well as document review augment these girls’ stories to further illuminate their experience. A grounded theory analysis of these data uses my own cultural intuition. This analytic approach foregrounds the intersectionality of Black girls’ understanding of their racial and gendered educational experiences in a predominantly White suburban environment, the systemic barriers that serve to inhibit their success, and the methods of resistance girls use to persist in these spaces. This study is significant in both its methodology as well as results, offering critical insight into how to conduct equitable and liberatory research and create education policies to improve outcomes for this underserved group.

Historical empathy (HE) is refers to deep inquiry in which academic and emotional responses to historical content are shaped through source analysis of the actions, motives, perspectives, and beliefs of people in the past. There are limited studies about whether students demonstrate HE through analysis of underrepresented historical figures. Additionally, studies are limited on how students’ social identities influence demonstration of HE. Consequently, there is a gap in the literature with regard to whether source analysis of underrepresented historical figures, as well as students’ social identities, impact demonstration of HE and critical race consciousness (CRC). Elizabeth Jennings is an example of an underrepresented historical figure. She was an African American teacher who was forcibly ejected from a streetcar due to her race in 1854. Jennings sued the streetcar company and won. Although Jennings set an important precedent for African Americans to use the legal system to challenge antebellum segregation ordinances, she remains a relatively obscure historical figure. The purpose of this study was to examine whether or not an instructional unit about Elizabeth Jennings called “The Elizabeth Jennings Project” (EJP) promotes conditions conducive for student demonstration of HE and/or CRC. A case study of one middle and two high school classes was conducted at one private, non-secular school in an urban area of the Northeast. Instructional methods that best promoted HE included in-class discussion and debate. Students provided insights about their social identities during focus group sessions with regard to how the EJP fostered HE and CRC.

A (dis)Assemblage of the Gallery-Growlery exhibition and writing presents itself as a site of a morphological exploration of language, sound, and objects in tandem with the irreducibly venting black expression. Venting, the black expression never seeks wholeness within objects or language itself for it is a thing-in-itself. Its presence affords critical reception to a residue of delimiting forms. All growls eschew verbal objects for the manifestation of pure phonetics. A growl in a gallery is the growl. The growl resounds through the physicality of the objects and gallery. Also, it unwinds the object-among-objects as the phono-present stretches the discursive and existential limits of the Fanonian phenomenon. Hence, the contention and conjunction between physicality and acoustics—the visual and sonic—is the gallery-growlery.

Master of Science / Department of Special Education, Counseling and Student Affairs / Doris Wright Carroll / Privilege and its’ impact on the racial and social constructs of fraternity and sorority life is an issue that has plagued the past and continues to determine the future. The examination of literature and the application of both Critical Race Theory and Critical Race Feminist Theory provides the theoretical framework for defining this issue. While White privilege does not answer all questions regarding race and how it determines sorority and fraternity membership, it does seek to address issues surrounding the traditions and customs in fraternity and sorority life. Additionally, in using a Critical Race Feminist perspective it seeks to address issues regarding the formalized sorority recruitment process used by traditionally White sororities and its impact on multicultural students. As a result of the findings within the literature, the traditional practices fraternities and sororities cling to only further draw discriminatory barriers between traditionally White Greek organizations and potential multicultural members. Furthermore, if this issue is not addressed within both higher education and Greek life it could signal further racially dividing issues. With the impact of biracial and multiracial students becoming more prevalent on campuses, student affairs practitioners must work to redefine what race and ethnicity mean in terms of student affiliation and involvement. Future research must study the impact of segregated governing organizations and their impact on creating cohesion between multicultural and traditionally White fraternal organizations.