Introduction: Priorities of Praxis Using Feminist Pedagogy to (Re)Imagine Online Classrooms

Feminist Pedagogy and Student Engagement

Feminist pedagogy, like other liberatory pedagogies, emerged as a response to the use of educational institutions as colonial tools that continually entrench oppressive practices regarding gender—as well as race, class, sexuality, and disability—through their intent, content, teaching strategy, and access. Since the 17th century, Western imperial governments across North America have used educational practices actively to convert, eliminate, and replace Indigenous and later Black and immigrant knowledge systems with Western religions and ideals (Malott, 2021). These practices privileged patriarchy, capitalism, and white supremacy to maximize profits using Indigenous, Black, and immigrant labourers, control territory, and consolidate power (Malott, 2021).

During the 19th and early 20th centuries, while the United States withheld educational opportunities from enslaved and freed Black people, Canada and the United States used residential schools to eliminate Indigenous cultures and peoples, a continuance of colonial cultural genocide through education (Malott, 2021; Woolford, 2015). In the 20th century, as national governments created standardized educational systems, they used education to entrench oppressive social norms for race, gender, and class. From the 1950s to the 1980s, as social movements such as the American Indian movement, the Civil Rights Movement, and the Women’s Liberation Movement emerged, educators began to apply liberatory practices to their classrooms in attempts to decolonize and democratize educational spaces (Freire, 2020; Malott, 2021; Shrewsbury, 1987). For example, feminist educators began to create active and student-centred teaching strategies such as encouraging student agency, emphasizing different ways of knowing, and enhancing collaboration (Crabtree et al., 2009; Shrewsbury, 1987). Over time, many feminist educators have broadened their outlook to include intersectional approaches that view gender, race, class, sexuality, and disability as intertwined systems of oppression with roots in the colonial experience (hooks, 2014). Although the emergence of online classrooms in the first two decades of the 21st century has offered the possibility of a new form of democratization in providing marginalized people with more opportunities to attain a college education, the instructors and designers often still use the top-down strategies—rooted in colonialism and profit making—that feminist and liberatory scholars in face-to-face classrooms eschew (Chick & Hassel, 2009; FemTechNet, 2020).

Considering this history, this book builds upon scholarship honed over the past 20 years by a growing community of feminist scholars interested in addressing systems of oppression in higher education and increasing student agency online (Blackburn, 2012; Callahan, 2013; Chick & Hassel, 2009; hooks, 2000; Light et al., 2015; Richards, 2011; Selfe, 1999; Siebler, 2008; Turpin, 2007). These educators have found that using feminist pedagogical frameworks in online teaching empowers students and provides educators with an intersectional feminist pedagogical purpose to undo inequalities operating through social hierarchies of gender, race, class, and sexuality (Blackburn, 2012). As Light et al. explain, “feminist pedagogy typically critiques traditional received wisdom, recognizes the existing knowledge of students, challenges the hierarchy of ways of knowing …, renegotiates and reforms the relationship between teacher and student, and respects and values the diversity of personal experiences of all students while relating the learning in academic classrooms to the ‘real world’” (2015, p. 4).

Aligning online curricula with feminist practices such as incorporating personal experiences into learning activities and giving students control over their learning provides educators with opportunities to (re)consider how they might be entrenching discriminatory practices within their own pedagogies (Bond, 2019). Feminist pedagogies often prioritize emancipatory agendas for diverse student populations and provide frameworks for instructors to interrogate divides found in online classrooms such as digital literacy and technology access (Blackburn, 2012; Chick & Hassel, 2009; Nworie, 2021; Turpin, 2007). As Callahan (2013, p. 158) explains, understanding “who and where our students are today, and the gaps and divisions in personal, financial, and educational opportunities” that they experience, helps educators to develop learning opportunities that resist larger systematized structures of power and privilege. Although these oppressive structures are not unique to higher education, they certainly underpin discriminatory practices that can be (re)produced in online classrooms (Blackburn, 2012; Turpin, 2007).

Additionally, Feminist Pedagogy for Teaching Online supports educators in finding new ways to enhance student agency via digital distance. Despite prevalent beliefs about the negative inclination of transactional distance in online learning, some educators view the space afforded by online platforms as diminishing or even eliminating the problematic power dynamics at play in traditional classrooms. Some educators and students have found that online distance provides room to amplify women’s voices and minimize the expansive power gaps between teachers and students (Herman & Kirkup, 2017). “Separation” from traditional classroom spaces can function as an empowering precursor that allows students to “disengage from non-productive power relations in the learning context, and to self-manage their time and energy” (Herman & Kirkup, 2017, p. 784). Also, some have found that operating classrooms within “personal and private realms” can work against explicit and implicit forms of discrimination enforced (and reinforced) by their brick-and-mortar counterparts (Winkleman, 1995, p. 442).

Virtual classrooms can be designed to increase the possibilities for equal access to learning since the dynamics of online spaces can allow for the recognition of differences and confidence building (Steele, 2021). In these distant yet shared spaces, students can maintain some control over their contributions and knowledge construction (Chick & Hassel, 2009). This democratization is important because “it is the socially disempowered and often isolated groups that are availing themselves in the greatest numbers of the online learning environment” (Chick & Hassel, 2009, p. 201). Since many students who participate in online learning opportunities do so because they are non-traditional in one sense or another, often they both need and desire flexibility and freedom (Aneja, 2016; Blackburn, 2012; Chick & Hassel, 2009; Turpin, 2007). For these students, a feminist course design can offer an online learning space that enhances student engagement and helps to cultivate control for students who might otherwise feel bereft of their own agency (Blackburn, 2012; Turpin, 2007).

Applying feminist pedagogical approaches encourages educators to adopt a more egalitarian teaching style that aligns with facilitating student learning rather than being an authoritative presence in the classroom. King (1993, p. 30) describes this movement as an intentional shift from “sage on the stage” to “guide on the side.” By moving beyond the outdated role of traditional and transactional teacher, educators can become “facilitators of experiences, reflections, and ways of thinking” (Jiménez-Cortés & Aires, 2021, p. 15). Loosening classroom hierarchies can result in more meaningful educational experiences for all members of a classroom community (Chick & Hassel, 2009, p. 204). In this way, a focus on facilitation opens multiple avenues for student empowerment and agency by assuming that students bring valuable experiences and expertise to any teaching and learning encounter (Chick & Hassel, 2009, p. 203).

Taking a facilitator stance encourages students to participate actively in knowledge building. Furthermore, these new facilitative interactions can lead to the legitimization of student contributions (Aneja, 2016; Chick & Hassel, 2009; Herman & Kirkup, 2017; Turpin, 2007). Even with these advantages, as DePew and Lettner-Rust (2009) note, there is no entirely prescriptive-free educational experience. Online instructors, like their brick-and-mortar counterparts, almost inevitably still enact authorial gazes, assign grades, and perpetuate traditional institutional power dynamics (Blackburn, 2012; Chick & Hassel, 2009; DePew & Lettner-Rust, 2009). Nevertheless, implementing feminist pedagogical practices in online spaces orients the classroom experience toward a more egalitarian approach and creates important shifts in power and perspective (Blackburn, 2012; Richards, 2011). And, though such acts might seem to be small, their contributions to online student engagement and empowerment can be great.

Feminist Pedagogy for Teaching Online is centred on the experience of the learner, establishing space for building more egalitarian communities through community-driven knowledge production and collaboration. Honouring the lived experiences of online learners helps students to feel comfortable with, and perhaps increasingly committed to, their educational journeys. Faculty can develop learning activities that recognize (and reward) the individuality of the learning experience as well as inspire diverse and inclusive student-student and instructor-student interactions (Swan, 2005). As scholars indicate, “professors and students ask tough questions and craft complex answers, wrestle with timely problems and posit innovative solutions, and grapple with ethical dilemmas for which they seek just resolutions” (Light et al., 2015, pp. 3–4).

Within online spaces, these multi-focal interactions build community and encourage collaboration while diminishing the chances of student isolation. Feminist-designed content for online education encourages egalitarianism in these exchanges and acknowledges that in “the online context the dynamic is different, as everyone gets a chance to speak in the forum and it is more difficult to be shouted down or feel put on the spot” (Callahan, 2013, p. 159). Online educators need to think, however, about how they can prepare and encourage students to participate in interactive dialogues that positively challenge and promote change in their understanding (Rovai, 2004; Stewart et al., 2009).

Feminist pedagogy shares these transformative goals with emancipatory educational endeavours geared to promoting student empowerment while practising critical thinking (Freire, 2003). Gillam and Wooden (2013, p. 28) note that, “as we create ways for students to get to know one another, we must encourage them to see their complex ecological makeup and that of their collaborators, to mindfully participate in the formation of a new ecological community with their peer group, and to become cognizant of the ways in which those complex ecologies influence knowledge formation and communication.”

In this way, instructors can design their online course infrastructures to operate as communal spaces. By promoting purposeful collaboration, online classrooms have even more potential to entrench egalitarian and emancipatory efforts. Some research suggests that the best way to realize this kind of teamwork is through a communal project that “facilitates shared understandings and learnings through the articulation of many voices” (Winkleman, 1995, p. 444). This pathway requires clarity and compassion as educators guide students through the process of breaking the boundaries imposed by systematized educational structures. Such considerations can occur via the integration of carefully designed learning activities that empower students to stretch their critical thinking skills. As Bali (2019) suggests, instructors should be explicit not only about promoting critical thinking but also about the larger feminist project of trying to understand the world better from a social justice lens that situates them as agents of resistance and possibility. Feminist pedagogy supports these critical thinking skills of understanding and reflection that students can take with them into their future courses and beyond (Bali, 2019; Chick & Hassel, 2009).

Feminist Pedagogy for Teaching Online

The voices included in this book are centred on the use of feminist pedagogical principles within the context of online learning. For educators who care deeply about humanizing the learning experience in digital spaces, the authors provide recommendations based on their own experiences designing and teaching courses online. As these chapters indicate, there are many ways to (re)centre student experiences in digital learning spaces. Some educators approach this goal by promoting connections, encouraging reflexivity, and asking students to embody their learning. Others have found that equity work can happen when groups collaborate on a common goal and by learning from each other. Many online professionals have found that cultivating cultures of care builds better classroom communities in digital spaces. Other educators understand that the same power structures and social inequalities that affect society are replicated and even amplified online. In response, many educators design their courses to confront these constraints. In the current era, with the alarming rise of fascist and anti-democracy campaigns infiltrating education and government, environmental crises such as pandemics and climate change, and intensive restriction of reproductive rights, addressing social injustices and undoing oppressions will continue to be necessary for educators for the foreseeable future. Likewise, as technology advances, educators and students will need to confront these changes by adjusting educational practices and guarding against the dangers posed by those applications. With these goals in mind, readers can use the insights from this book to apply feminist pedagogical practices in their courses to humanize online learning further and to promote social justice in their online courses.

In the first part, “Promoting Connections, Reflexivity, and Embodiment,” the authors address the feminist pedagogical tenets of connecting learning to communities outside academia, promoting reflexivity, and foregrounding materiality. This part provides theoretical and practical methods for operationalizing these tenets in online classrooms. The ongoing lessons learned by students and educators during ERT highlight the importance of students interacting with each other, their communities, and the wider world. Yet many educators still face the challenge of fostering interactions among students, the instructor, and the content when designing an online course. Letizia Guglielmo shares how to use discussion boards to go beyond perfunctory interactions. She describes how to design discussions that promote collaborative engagement by inviting students to become co-creators of knowledge and experience. Jo Hemlatha, Saanchi Saxena, and Rujuta Date also illustrate how they centred transformation within a community of learners while engaging with the broader community by expanding beyond a unidirectional and limited scope of learning. They highlight key considerations such as selecting content, structuring discussions, and caring for the self to support students and the broader community. Rebecca Cottrell and Ann Obermann focus on the relational aspect of course design when instructional designers, faculty members, and students co-create courses. The Relational Course Design Collaboration is used as a model to bring together instructional designers and faculty members as well as students to create courses that are innovative and responsive learning environments. Similarly, Stephanie Rollag Yoon, Jana Lo Bello Miller, and Staci Gilpin present the results of their study of relational, rather than transactional, discussion boards. They provide a discussion template, designed with student input, which focuses on connection and community, encourages student-organized discussions to improve student participation, and emphasizes the sharing of multiple perspectives.

In the second part, “Building Equity, Cooperation, and Co- Education,” the feminist pedagogical tenets of inviting students to be agentic creators of knowledge with a focus on co-educating, while acknowledging the lived experiences of students and their power to expand knowledge, are incorporated into tangible online teaching practices. The authors illustrate that centring the student experience and honouring the knowledge that students bring and offer to the community can promote equity in the online learning environment and the world beyond. Bridget Kriner describes multiple ways to use formative assessment to provide students with insights into their learning, co-create knowledge, and foster community. Annotation software, interactive videos, and wikis are recommended to engage students within participatory spaces for increased learning and community building. Xinyue Ren introduces readers to the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework to incorporate the use of technology into content and pedagogical knowledge. By applying this framework through the lens of feminist pedagogy, educators can promote learning and social change. Ashley Glassburn explains that, though the flipped classroom model has gained widespread popularity, this method can be limiting and even harmful in courses that include sensitive content that requires deep discussion and processing with others. She presents readers with a format to promote dialogue and care by utilizing consciousness-raising and trauma-informed practices to support the flipped classroom model for an asynchronous online course. Clare Daniel details how social annotation can be used to achieve feminist pedagogical aims such as providing spaces for students to learn in a collective setting and make meaning of shared texts in equitable ways. She presents the results of a research project with a focus on student responses to annotation assignments, providing readers with a window through which to see how social annotation affects student learning.

The contributions of the authors in the third part, “Creating Cultures of Care in the Online Classroom,” provide readers with several practices for using learning activities to address the needs and health of students. Nandita Gurjar and Priya Gurjar present an overview of the humanizing nature of feminist pedagogy and introduce the photovoice process and SHOWeD coding method. When combined, these techniques lead to a student-led and participant-designed interview process situated in feminist pedagogy. Dana Rognlie, Kathryn Frazier, and Elizabeth Siler offer recommendations for humanizing course policies to achieve a truly feminist space in which instructors account for the oppressive frames embedded within current educational structures and practices. Policies for late work, participation, and attendance are reconstructed and co-constructed with students to remove the punitive structures that inhibit student learning. Nadia Jaramillo Cherrez and Enilda Romero-Hall share the results of a study conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic to identify how instructors humanized the learning experiences of students. The study design and findings provide insights into how educators can better incorporate feminist pedagogical principles into their courses.

The final part of the book, “Interrogating Knowledge Production, Social Inequality, and Power,” engages in a core set of feminist pedagogical principles. With advances in technology, there are great opportunities for increased engagement within and across communities while also learning about communities worldwide. Meanwhile, technology adoption in educational spaces also comes with widespread misinformation and privacy risks. This part provides insights into how we can ethically implement technology to support greater equity and social justice. Karen Barton offers a framework for providing students with skills and knowledge for addressing social justice issues. Barton uses feminist pedagogy to call on students’ attention and skill development to re-evaluate knowledge systems, promote sustainability, and give voice to communities. Sarah Payne, Steven James Mockler, Sarah Lohnes Watulak, and Amy Collier provide a blueprint for using cryptoparties, sessions co-created by instructors, academic technologists, and students that increase awareness and knowledge of digital privacy protections. Specifically, the Zoom against the Machine cryptoparties include a threat modelling activity inviting participants to consider their positionality and intersectionality for online privacy protections. Jacquelyne Thoni Howard examines the impact of using surveillance technologies on students in online education and illustrates ways to avoid unethical technical and data practices. As educational technology companies promote the use of data analytics and exam proctoring tools, instructors and institutions need to increase awareness and criticism of the ways in which users—including students, instructors, and institutions—are co-opted into a process that embeds hierarchies into online classrooms.

With these chapters, this book intentionally highlights the lived experiences of diverse educators, honouring various feminist pedagogical practices not always prevalent in postsecondary education yet still paramount. By providing educators with both a theoretical foundation and a practical how-to, Feminist Pedagogy for Teaching Online can expand the pedagogical canon while empowering educators and students in online spaces. This collection brings together diverse identities, nationalities, and disciplines toward the praxis of feminist pedagogy in the online learning environment. As more students access online education worldwide, this book and the digital guide will provide educators with tangible ways to engage students that are truly transformational while honouring and building upon their feminist pedagogical perspectives and knowledge (Howard, et al., 2025).

References

• Aneja, A. (2016). Blending in: Reconciling feminist pedagogy and distance education across cultures. Gender and Education, 29(7), 850–868. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2016.1237621
• Bali, M. (2019). Reimagining digital literacies from a feminist perspective in a postcolonial context. Media and Communication (Lisboa), 7(2), 69–81. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i2.1935
• Blackburn, J. (2012). Feminist composition pedagogy and the hypermediated fractures in the contact zone. Forum—Conference on College Composition and Communication, 25. Association of Teachers of Advanced Composition, 2012. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ985774
• Bond, N. (2019, September 4). Reflections on forming a virtually intentional feminist pedagogy. Scholarly Teacher. https://www.scholarlyteacher.com/post/reflections-on-forming-a-virtually-feminist-pedagogy
• Callahan, V. (2013). Toward networked feminist scholarship: Mindful media, participatory learning, and distributed authorship in the digital economy. Cinema Journal, 53(1), 156–163. https://doi.org/10.1353/cj.2013.0056
• Chick, N., & Hassel, H. (2009). “Don’t hate me because I’m virtual”: Feminist pedagogy in the online classroom. Feminist Teacher, 19(3), 195–215. https://doi.org/10.1353/ftr.0.0049
• Crabtree, R., Sapp, D. A., & Licona, A. C. (2009). Feminist pedagogy: Looking back to move forward. Johns Hopkins University Press. https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/feminist-pedagogy
• Darby, F. (2020, June 16). Sorry not sorry: Online teaching is here to stay. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/sorry-not-sorry-online-teaching-is-here-to-stay
• DePew, K., & Lettner-Rust, H. (2009). Mediating power: Distance learning interfaces, classroom epistemology, and the gaze. Computers and Composition, 26(3), 174–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2009.05.002
• FemTechNet. (2020, March 28). Feminist pedagogy in a time of coronavirus pandemic. https://femtechnet.org/feminist-pedagogy-in-a-time-of-coronavirus-pandemic/
• Freire, P. (2003). The banking concept of education. In A. S. Canestrari & B. A. Marlowe (Eds.), Educational foundations: An anthology of critical readings (pp. 99–111). Sage Publications.
• Freire, P. (2020). Pedagogy of the oppressed. In J. Beck, C. Jenkins, N. Kiddie, & M. F. D. Young (Eds.), Toward a sociology of education (pp. 374–386). Routledge. http://doi.org/10.4324/9780429339530
• Gillam, K., & Wooden, S. R. (2013). Re-embodying online composition: Ecologies of writing in unreal time and space. Computers and Composition, 30(1), 24–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2012.11.001
• Herman, C., & Kirkup, G. (2017). Combining feminist pedagogy and transactional distance to create gender-sensitive technology-enhanced learning. Gender and Education, 29(6), 781–795. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2016.1187263
• Herman, P. (2020, June 9). Online learning is not the future. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/views/2020/06/10/online-learning-not-future-higher-education-opinion
• Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020, March 27). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning
• hooks, b. (2000). Where we stand: Class matters. Routledge.
• hooks, b. (2014). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203700280
• Howard, J., Daniel, C. Romero-Hall, E., Newman, L., & Bond, N. (2025). Feminist Pedagogy for Teaching Online: A Digital Guide. https://feministstecach.org
• Jiménez-Cortés, R., & Aires, L. (2021). Feminist trends in distance and hybrid higher education: A scoping review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(60), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-02-00297-4
• King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching, 41(1), 30–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.1993.9926781
• Light, T. P., Nicholas, J., & Bondy, R. (Eds.). (2015). Feminist pedagogy in higher education: Critical theory and practice. Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
• Malott, C. (2021). A history of education for the many: From colonization and slavery to the decline of US imperialism. Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350085749
• Marcus, J. (2022, October 6). With online learning, “let’s take a breath and see what worked and didn’t work.” New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/06/education/learning/online-learning-higher-education.html
• Nworie, J. (2021, May 19). Beyond COVID-19: What’s next for online teaching and learning in higher education. Educause Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2021/5/beyond-covid-19-whats-next-for-online-teaching-and-learning-in-higher-education
• Richards, R. (2011). “I could have told you that wouldn’t work”: Cyberfeminist pedagogy in action. Feminist Teacher, 22(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.5406/femteacher.22.1.0005
• Romero-Hall, E.J. (2022). Navigating the instructional design field as an Afro-Latinx woman: A feminist autoethnography. TechTrends, 66(1). 39–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00681-x
• Rovai, A. (2004). A constructivist approach to online college learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2003.10.002
• Selfe, C. (1999). Technology and literacy: A story about the perils of not paying attention. College Composition and Communication, 50(3), 411–436. https://doi.org/10.2307/358859
• Shrewsbury, C. M. (1987). What is feminist pedagogy? Women’s Studies Quarterly, 15(3–4), 6–14.
• Siebler, K. (2008). Composing feminism(s): How feminists have shaped composition theories and practices. Hampton Press.
• Steele, C. K. (2021). Digital Black feminism. New York University Press.
• Stewart, C., Bachman, C., & Babb, S. (2009). Replacing professor monologues with online dialogues: A constructivist approach to online course template design. Journal of Online Teaching and Learning, 5(3), 511–521.
• Swan, K. (2005). A constructivist model for thinking about learning online. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality online education: Engaging communities (pp. 1–251). Olin College-Sloan-C.
• Tobin, T. (2020, March 25). Now is not the time to access online learning. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/now-is-not-the-time-to-assess-online-learning/
• Turpin, C. A. (2007). Feminist praxis, online teaching, and the urban campus. Feminist Teacher, 18(1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1353/ftr.2008.0017
• Ubell, R. (2021, March 8). Why emergency online learning got low grades from many college students. EdSurge. https://www.edsurge.com/news/2021-03-08-why-emergency-online-learning-got-low-grades-from-many-college-students
• Winkleman, C. (1995). Electronic literacy, critical pedagogy, and collaboration: A case for cyborg writing. Computers and the Humanities, 29(6), 431–448. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01829875
• Woolford, A. J. (2015). This benevolent experiment: Indigenous boarding schools, genocide, and redress in Canada and the United States. University of Manitoba Press; University of Nebraska Press.