Feminist Pedagogy and Online Learning

One essential element of successful feminist pedagogy in formal education is ensuring that “students are recognized and supported in their learning as a whole person, with all the experiences, emotions, relationships, knowledge and skills that shape them as a human being” (Köseoğlu, 2020, p. 282). Taking this emphasis on learning as “a whole person” could lead one to view feminist pedagogy and online learning at odds with one another—the very nature of online learning, especially in asynchronous modalities, can make it difficult to engage students in this holistic manner since the structure of the modality in both time and space creates a barrier to relationship building. Aneja (2017, p. 853) describes perceptions of the limitations of distance education, perceived by some as “knowledge delivery to passive consumers”; she notes that distance education “could very well-run counter to feminist ethics of knowledge sharing as community building, and knowledge creation in equitable environments.” However, Chung (2016, p. 375) challenges this assumption, noting that feminist pedagogy is well situated in online learning environments and “has a lot in common with the basic values and goals of online teaching and learning.” Similarly, Chick and Hassel (2009, p. 196) assert that “feminist pedagogy and the cyber-classroom can and should be productively paired.”

Köseoğlu (2020) articulates that identification of the possible barriers inherent in online learning, along with providing ample support for content and assignments, can move feminist pedagogy from the abstract to the concrete. Part of the issue related to imagining a feminist pedagogy in online classrooms stems from the possibly futile comparison of online learning classrooms with face-to-face classrooms. Many comparisons between modalities have arisen in the literature, often with little acknowledgement of how such comparisons are rarely constructive ways to approach course design. For example, Bailey (2017, p. 262) argues that we tend to romanticize the experience of discussions in the face-to-face classroom, wondering whether we “[demand] from online classes experiences that are based on mythological ideas about [discussion’s] value in our physical classrooms.” Instead of romanticizing face-to-face classroom experiences, perhaps we ought to turn our attention to effective and intentional course design that considers how communication will be facilitated best in any given course modality. Furthermore, “hands-on activities, group-based discussions, or collaborative working to explore the nuances and complexities” (Pownall, 2022, p. 111) serve not only as tools for learning but also as spaces where communication among the class community is central to the process of learning, where what we learn from each other is on par with what we learn from course content. Because learning is socially and politically situated, how learners “see themselves in relation to other people, tools and resources” is important (Köseoğlu, 2020, p. 282). Thus, online courses that foster relationships in the process of knowledge co-creation can help learners “to become agents of their own, and each other’s, learning” (Gajjala et al., 2017, p. 15).

Transactional Distance in Online Learning

One important barrier to enacting a feminist pedagogy online is the physical distance between members of the class community; in the literature on online learning, this gap is called transactional distance (TD) (Moore, 1993). In order to bridge the TD gap, course design should aim to create structured opportunities for communication and dialogue since lower TD correlates positively with effective learning and student engagement (Moore, 1991). Dockter (2016) describes TD as a barrier to the development of meaningful relationships in an online class; as such, effective course design must be intentional in its aim to foster communication with available tools. Bolliger and Halupa (2018, p. 312) demonstrate the negative correlation between student engagement and TD, arguing that lower transactional distance leads students “to feel engaged and satisfied and … [to perceive] more progress towards their learning goals and success.” By using teaching strategies designed to encourage interpersonal interactions (Bolliger & Halupa, 2018; Vonderwell, 2004), deeper engagement and greater student success can be achieved.

Formative Assessment

Literature focused on feminist assessment as a component of feminist pedagogy is relatively scarce, presumably because of a perceived incongruity between assessment as a practice and feminist pedagogy (Accardi, 2013). In other words, there is a perception that assessment is focused solely on measurement and evaluation, which can be enacted in dehumanizing and problematic ways. In general, assessment is categorized according to the binary of formative and summative—the goal of formative is to monitor student learning and engagement in the learning process, whereas summative is more evaluative. In this chapter, I focus on formative assessment practices in asynchronous online classes, illustrating how such assessment can build community and foster knowledge co-creation in asynchronous learning environments. As Angelo and Cross (1993, p. 5) assert in their repository of formative assessments (i.e., Classroom Assessment Techniques [CATs]), “the purpose is to improve the quality of student learning, not to provide evidence for evaluating or grading [the] student.” Such formative assessment plays an essential role in teaching and learning and allows us to check for student understanding and identify gaps in learning while giving students opportunities to demonstrate knowledge and monitor their own learning (Bergquist & Holbeck, 2014; Hanson & Florestano, 2020; Luckritz Marquis 2021).

All of these processes align well with the aims of feminist pedagogy. Luckritz Marquis (2021) stresses that formative assessments are relational and can support relationship building and foster community in online courses. In a face-to-face classroom, a teacher can deploy extemporaneously any number of formative assessments to check for student understanding and engagement. Gikandi et al. (2011, p. 2347) assert the value of formative assessment since “it offers online learners opportunities for enhanced interactivity and formative feedback, which in turn, engage them with valuable learning experiences including active, contextual, interactive, collaborative, multidimensional, reflective and self-regulated aspects of meaningful learning. Finally, formative assessment can foster learning relationships between classroom peers, provide a safe space for learners to experiment with knowledge creation, and decrease the psychological distance between teachers and learners (Cross & Palese, 2015). Given the value of formative assessment in teacher-learner interactions, it is important that course design across all modalities includes quality formative assessment.

Social Annotation Tools

Social annotation activities can be implemented using various platforms (e.g., Genius, Hypothes.is, and Perusall). In general, the use of these tools helps to “tap into reading and writing’s social dimensions” (Sievers, 2021, p. 429). The capabilities of these tools vary, but most platforms enable participants to annotate text on either a webpage or a document and to reply to the annotations posted by others. Many tools also allow for participants to embed media such as hyperlinks and images or to use audio or video annotation formats alongside written ones. What first attracted me to social annotation—the practice of collaboratively and collectively annotating a shared text—was the way in which it enabled me to facilitate an interactive and visual discussion of a text. This practice has always been central to my synchronous teaching, in which I call on my students to examine texts together with me in real time in order to build a shared understanding derived from close reading; in my observation, students develop a deeper understanding of the specific language and authorial choices as well as draw deeper connections among ideas presented in a given text from this pedagogical practice. I am able to demonstrate essential reading skills such as analysis and synthesis and how to support claims with textual evidence, an important building block in constructing arguments. In working together to decipher and make meaning from a text in a class, the class functions as a community that co-creates knowledge, characteristic of feminist pedagogy.

Social annotation is the tool that effectively enables me to translate collaborative close reading of a text in an asynchronous setting. In highlighting and responding to specific textual passages, students can make visual connections and build upon each other’s responses. Although discussion boards in most learning management systems also provide opportunities for discussion, social annotation keeps the text itself central to discussion since the responses are embedded there. Paul Schacht (2016, p. 7) points to several important ways that social annotation aligns with feminist pedagogy, “the potential to advance a pedagogy committed to questioning authority and asserting democratic ownership of knowledge and culture.”

Indeed, social annotation places participants on a more equal footing with the text’s original creator since they can talk back and challenge the author in a more direct way than making a reference to a passage in a discussion on a discussion board. Furthermore, in responding to peers, the context of the original annotation is ever present, allowing for more focused and productive responses. The added benefit of social annotation is how it allows for more inclusive participation. Because students do not have to respond extemporaneously, they can process a given text at their own rate, potentially taking more time to digest a difficult text. Social annotation is an effective and easy way to implement the practice of formative assessment since it allows me as an instructor to gauge students’ understanding of assigned readings as well as provide feedback to guide interpretation and give additional contextual information to support students’ reading of a work. For example, in a social annotation of The Declaration of Sentiments, I provide notes and explanations to clarify some features of the 19th-century prose style, which can create a barrier for some students unaccustomed to reading texts of this nature. In short, social annotation tools create opportunities for a discussion about a text and with a text to occur simultaneously, thus better integrating the text and the authorial voice that generated it with the participants’ meaning making, and allowing for peer interaction and engagement, an important component of the feminist pedagogical principle of community building.

Interactive Video Platforms

Similar to social annotation tools, interactive video tools such as PlayPosit and Panoto create opportunities for members of a class community to interact with video-based content asynchronously. Instructors can enrich video content that is either self-created (e.g., a recorded video lecture or animated PowerPoint presentation) or an open-source recording (e.g., a Ted Talk or YouTube video). These platforms allow instructors to interpolate activities throughout the videos, such as questions, discussions, web links, and instructor comments within the playback of the video, thereby transforming any recorded media into an interactive lesson in which the video is paused to allow students to process information, interact with peers and the instructor in a discussion format, or respond to questions for the purposes of formative assessment (Haagsman et al., 2020; Szpunar et al., 2013).

PlayPosit allows an instructor to insert a discussion prompt into the video that students can stop and respond to in the course of viewing; this was one reason that I was drawn to implementing this particular tool in my asynchronous courses. Including video content has always been a staple of my synchronous classroom pedagogy. Playing a short part of a longer documentary or even presenting a relevant pop cultural artifact such as a TikTok video broadens the diversity of voices presented to students, both literally and figuratively. In presenting video content in classes, I often pause the video in order to ask a question and gather students’ responses; this is an ideal example of a formative assessment with the dual function of building classroom community since I can gauge understanding while students are listening and responding to one another. In such a situation in a synchronous context, I also occasionally pause briefly to point out an important detail. For example, in the playback of the short documentary Why Hasn’t Sexual Harassment Disappeared?, I pause it briefly at a scene showing Anita Hill’s testimony in the 1991 confirmation hearing of Clarence Thomas to note Joe Biden’s presence and role in these hearings. In much the same way that social annotation tools foster deep interactivity with a static text, interactive video tools allow me to engage students with video texts. This functionality really enhances the asynchronous classroom since students can react to and discuss elements of the video content at the moment of first contact, allowing for more organic and authentic responses. Interactive video tools also foster the creation of interactive lectures. By recording a short video lecture on my phone or using voice-recording tools in PowerPoint, I can then interpolate questions eliciting discussions in the lecture video, which closely mimics my approach to presenting new content in a synchronous setting. Much like social annotation, this type of video activity can allow for a richer discussion since students can respond at their own pace.

Wiki Building

Whereas social annotation and interactive video tools provide effective opportunities to interact with a variety of texts and information sources, wikis are useful in facilitating the collaborative generation of written content. Glynn-Adey (2021, p. 124) aptly defines the nature and purpose of wikis as “interactive websites which facilitate the process of collaborative writing and knowledge sharing. Users log on to a wiki, access various pages, and perform edits. A database manages the edits, keeps track of a history of revisions and edits, and stores additional data related to the textual content such as images or videos.” Wikis allow for social engagement with peers in the process of meaning making and knowledge co-creation (Glynn-Adey, 2021; Leng et al., 2021, p. 2378). Like the other tools discussed, wikis promote collaboration and discussion among students in the process of knowledge co-creation. Wikis allow them to write and create new content collaboratively based on their collective processing of course content. This activity can be implemented for a variety of assignment types, both shorter projects and longer, more intense ones. For example, I have used a wiki assignment that requires students to generate an annotated playlist of songs in response to a reading or other course concept. When I cover the concept of the social construction of gender, I ask students to build a class wiki-based playlist of songs in audio or video format that either reinforce or push back against gender stereotypes. Longer, more complex projects such as research presentations or papers can also be developed using a wiki. As a tool for formative assessment, it gives me the ability to monitor progress and offer feedback less formally during the course of a project. As a tool to foster the tenets of feminist pedagogy, wiki-based assignments in asynchronous classes encourage both relationship building and knowledge co-creation.