6 Technology Integration in Online Feminist Pedagogy
Xinyue Ren
Feminist pedagogy refers to a liberatory way of teaching to develop democratic and transformative learning experiences in which students can be empowered to make a social change (Grissom-Broughton, 2020). Previous research showed that feminist pedagogy was often used to guide course design and development in various disciplines, such as music, art, language, and environmental education (Cannizzo, 2021; Grissom-Broughton, 2020; Jespersen, 2014; Springgay & Zaliwska, 2017). For example, in music education, instructors increased the representations of multicultural voices in course materials and applied in-depth discussions and essays as learning assessments to develop critical and reflective thinking among students. In a feminist-oriented classroom, the power structures between instructors and students have been transformed (Cannizzo, 2021). For instance, instructors can serve as facilitators to collaborate with students to increase their role in knowledge creation. Other researchers discussed the effectiveness of using various technologies to support feminist pedagogy, such as fiction, narratives, art materials, documentary films, and zines (Hensel et al., 2017; Hess & Macomber, 2021; Jarvis, 2020; Kimberly, 2014). However, limited studies have examined the adoption of digital technologies to support online feminist pedagogy in interdisciplinary contexts, as indicated in collaborative learning and agents of social change.
Teaching is a complex activity. As Mishra and Koehler (2006) argued, the effectiveness of teaching and learning involves interrelationships among technology, pedagogy, and content. The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework can lay a foundation for teaching and learning excellence with technology integration in feminist pedagogy. Therefore, I aim in this chapter to investigate considerations and practices implementing digital technology to support online feminist pedagogy through the lens of the TPACK framework. The chapter will contribute to the field of faculty professional development, in which educators can deepen their understanding of the implementation of digital technologies to support feminist pedagogy in multidisciplinary fields. Meanwhile, university administrators and staff, such as instructional designers, can provide faculty with effective support and resources while aligning course content with feminist pedagogical and technological knowledge to achieve the desired course learning outcomes.
Literature Review
Feminist Pedagogy
Feminist pedagogy (FP) was originally used as a teaching method in women’s studies courses (Musil, 2008; Shackelford, 1992). In addition to discussing gender-related social issues exclusively in a classroom, many educators applied FP as a liberatory way of teaching, thinking, and learning. Feminist teaching practices aim to confront oppressive systems of power and stereotypes in traditional classrooms to build a student-centred learning community, as indicated in collaborative, critically reflective, and experiential learning (Cannizzo, 2021; Dahya et al., 2017; Musil, 2008). FP was often used to transform traditional learning environments into democratic, empowering, and inclusive communities in which all students are respected and welcomed (Amanova, 2021; Cannizzo, 2021; Chick & Hassel, 2009). For instance, in a feminist-oriented classroom, instructors applied conversational and reflective learning activities—such as dialogues, discussions, and debates—to raise students’ critical consciousness and develop their critical thinking (Hill & Weiger, 2021; Rosenblum & Harris, 2019).
FP in Online Learning Environments
Online learning has been a growing phenomenon in higher education worldwide, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. The accessibility and flexibility of online education were able to promote equal learning opportunities and participation among students, particularly historically under-represented groups, such as non-traditional learners and learners with disabilities (Aneja, 2017; Chick & Hassel, 2009; Köseoğlu, 2020; Moore et al., 2011; Redmond et al., 2018). However, the increase in online education created additional barriers for instructors and students, such as social isolation, low motivation, digital divides, and high attrition (Chick & Hassel, 2009; Denial, 2021; Dhala & Johnson, 2021). Because of these limitations, students with disadvantaged backgrounds are more vulnerable and likely to drop out of online programs (Bailey, 2017; Köseoğlu, 2020).
As Denial (2021, p. 135) argued, online learning is not a “natural equalizer, but … a modality that … required our sustained attention to matters of equality if students were to flourish.” Online instruction is not a replica of face-to-face teaching. Instead, online teaching is burdensome and requires instructors to put more time and effort into course preparation (Wingo et al., 2017). However, some researchers believe that FP and online instruction are a perfect match (Aneja, 2017). On the one hand, FP was well documented to support the effectiveness of online learning environments, as indicated in an open, safe, and productive atmosphere (Herman & Kirkup, 2017). On the other hand, feminist values can be achieved and maintained easily by integrating technology into online environments, such as activism, social change, and agency (Bailey, 2017; Baker & Ryalls, 2016). Feminist pedagogy is also known as a pedagogy of care, kindness, and hope (hooks, 2003). With the adoption of FP in online education, instructors can build a supportive, inclusive, and empowering online learning community for personal and social transformation. Students can feel a sense of belonging and contribute to authentic and critical conversations with their classmates (Baker & Ryalls, 2016). However, teaching can be complicated. To achieve online teaching excellence with FP, a theoretical framework is needed to examine the interrelationships among technology, pedagogy, and content.
The TPACK Framework
Traditionally, the knowledge of content, pedagogy, and technology has been separated in teacher education and faculty professional development. However, teaching and learning excellence relies heavily on the multi-faceted interrelationships among technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). Content knowledge (CK) means the knowledge of concepts or theories in a specific subject matter. Pedagogical knowledge (PK) refers to the knowledge of teaching practices and learning sciences to achieve the course objectives. Technological knowledge (TK) indicates knowledge of both standard and digital technologies. The TPACK framework (see Figure 6.1), showing the interplay among these three components, can lay a solid theoretical foundation to guide the integration of technology into feminist teaching practices.
The FP-Oriented TPACK Framework in Online Instruction
The TPACK framework is highly contextualized. In addition to the courses of the women’s studies program, FP has been widely applied as design thinking to guide course development and delivery in multidisciplinary contexts to challenge conventional stereotypes and build democratic online learning communities, such as digital humanities, language learning, biology, and computer science (Cannizzo, 2021; DeSpain, 2016; Giordano, 2016; Malazita & Resetar, 2019). To help promote technological integration in FP-informed online instruction, in this part I will elaborate on the implications of the TPACK framework in various contexts.
Feminist CK. One of the main values of FP is its ability to connect course content with students’ life experiences and social issues (Chick & Hassel, 2009). However, in some disciplines, such as technology, science, and engineering, it is commonly accepted that course content is separate from social and cultural issues (DeSpain, 2016; Malazita & Resetar, 2019; Vakil, 2020). In a feminist-oriented classroom, faculty are subject matter experts expected to make course content culturally relevant to their students rather than deliver knowledge in an isolated manner. Thus, feminist CK refers not only to the knowledge of course content in a specific discipline—such as humanities, languages, and sciences—but also to feminist-centred course materials, such as instructional materials representing controversial topics, social justice issues, and multicultural personal stories.
Figure 6.1. The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) Framework. Redrawn from source: TPACK website,
http://
Feminist PK. Feminist PK refers to the knowledge of feminist teaching practices, as demonstrated in learner interaction, learning activities, and assessments. A feminist-oriented classroom aims to democratize power stereotypes, cultivate students’ critical thinking, and achieve diversity and inclusion to promote social change (Chick & Hassel, 2009). For instance, in an FP-oriented classroom, the power structures between instructors and students have been transformed, and instructors can now share with students their responsibility for course design and development, such as course topics, contents, learning activities, grading policies, and syllabi (Cannizzo, 2021; Denial, 2021). Learners can play active roles in knowledge creation and construction (Bailey, 2017; Chick & Hassel, 2009). FP is also known as a pedagogy of care, kindness, and hope (hooks, 2003). It is anticipated that instructors can take the needs, responsibilities, and experiences of their students into consideration when designing and developing curricula (Denial, 2021).
Another primary goal of FP is to increase students’ responsibility and commitment to take action for social justice and transformation (Richards, 2013). Instructors can introduce content-related social issues and invite students to share multiple perspectives and contribute to critical conversations, debates, and open dialogues with their classmates. In the process, students can challenge social injustice and promote positive social change beyond the boundaries of the classroom (Baker & Ryalls, 2016). The incorporation of reflection-based learning activities—such as journalling, storytelling, and critical discussions—can also deepen students’ understanding of the course content and make connections with their personal experiences (Herman & Kirkup, 2017; Murray et al., 2013). Instead of using high-stakes exams, instructors can consider developing authentic assessments to align with learning outcomes—such as weekly reviews, reflective writing assignments, synthesis, and analysis—to develop students’ deep learning, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills in the disciplines. Hands-on activities and field trips offer students experiential learning opportunities to develop conceptual understanding in an authentic and situated manner.
Feminist TK. Feminist TK indicates the knowledge of technological integration to support feminist-oriented online instruction. For instance, learning management systems (LMSs) have been widely used to deliver fully online courses and programs (Afifi & Alamri, 2014; Morrison et al., 2010; Richards, 2013). Instructors have used various features of LMSs to increase social presence, such as discussions, groups, and announcements (Alexander & Sapra, 2014; Chick & Hassel, 2009; Dhala & Johnson, 2021). The use of multimedia-based social networking spaces, such as social media and blogging, can increase student engagement and collaboration in activism and critical issues. In these activities, students can develop critical thinking and become agents of social change outside the classroom (Hawkins, 2016; Vivakaran & Maraimalai, 2017). In an FP-based professional writing course, instructors applied wearable technologies to encourage student participation in conversations on surveillance to advocate concerns about ethics in health and data privacy (Hutchinson & Novotny, 2018).
Feminist TPACK. Feminist TPACK means the competency of choosing and using technologies to achieve specific tasks in a feminist-oriented classroom, such as teaching outcomes and learning needs. For instance, in women’s studies courses, the use of social media, such as Facebook and YouTube, encouraged democratic participation among students to question gendered stereotypes and reflect on social issues (Alexander & Sapra, 2014; Baker & Ryalls, 2016; DeSpain, 2016). The hashtag movements on Twitter were used to raise students’ awareness of intersectional identities and representations. Therefore, social networking platforms, such as social media and blogs, can be applied in feminist teaching practices to build a safe space for students to share their personal stories, make connections to the world, and advocate for social change (Amanova, 2021; Montgomery, 2018; Ringrose, 2018).
Considerations for Technological Integration in FP-Based Online Instruction
Quality feminist-adopted course design requires interplays among three components: feminist CK, PK, and TK. Since there is no single correct intervention for every course, the feminist-based TPACK model can play a crucial role in guiding the decision making of contextualized pedagogical and technological strategies in various disciplines. In this part, I elaborate on recommendations for technological integration in a feminist-based classroom through the lens of the TPACK model.
Collaborative Learning
One goal of FP is to create a collaborative learning community. The dynamics of the power structure between students and instructors have shifted in the online classroom. Students are expected to be more accountable for their learning and hold shared responsibility with their classmates and instructors for knowledge creation (Aneja, 2017). For instance, in a synthetic biology course, students worked with their classmates to discuss a hands-on research assignment to develop new ethical practices in the field. This collaborative learning practice can promote the establishment of a democratic science learning community (Giordano, 2016). Similarly, other feminist educators can select content-related social issues for students to participate in productive conversations. Therefore, tools for promoting social networking and community building are appropriate for the achievement of collaborative learning in FP-based courses. For example, some tools for communication, such as Slack and Teams, are appropriate to provide a space for learners to have effective group conversations. The use of discussion-based assessment tools—such as Spiral (which allows anonymous posts), Webjets, and Padlet—can encourage student participation in thoughtful dialogues to promote deeper learning (Roman, 2020). Interactive whiteboard tools—such as MURAL, Jamboard, Google Slides, Google Canvas, and OneNote—can also be applied to increase collaboration and creativity among students. In other contexts, social annotation tools—such as Google Docs, Annotate, and Hypothesis—can be used as asynchronous online collaborative spaces in which students can share their understandings and explanations of the same documents to foster a meaningful exchange of views among students. Some wiki software—such as MediaWiki and DokuWiki—can be used by students to create and edit course content to develop a knowledge community.
Agents of Social Change
Another central value of feminist-based teaching practice is to encourage students’ participation in social change. FP indicates a way of thinking and learning to foster and sustain social transformation beyond the limitations of the traditional classroom (Cannizzo, 2021). For example, activism or cyberactivism projects have been widely applied in many FP-based courses to foster students’ active roles in solving social problems and expanding course learning outcomes (Baker & Ryalls, 2016). Such projects also provide students with reflective learning opportunities to develop critical thinking skills. In these contexts, social media and digital storytelling technologies are appropriate to support the achievement of activist goals. For instance, some educators have applied social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, to engage students to participate in different course projects, such as hashtag activities, group discussions, journal entries, and reflections (Alexander & Sapra, 2014; Hawkins, 2016; Vivakaran & Maraimalai, 2017). Moreover, feminist scholars have recommended the use of digital storytelling technologies for students, especially under-represented populations, to find the values of their diverse voices and perspectives (Fox & Ebada, 2022; Rouhani, 2019). Digital storytelling refers to digital technology-based methods for narrative production, including blogging, microblogging, vlogging, plogging, and podcasting (Fox & Ebada, 2022). In reflection-oriented storytelling, they can raise the consciousness of social injustice and power imbalance to empower themselves and educate others (Rouhani, 2019).
Instructors can include other reflective activities to encourage students to reflect on readings and discussions to guide their decision making to address complex social issues. Some presentation building and sharing tools with multimedia functions—such as Flipgrid, VoiceThread, and Tumblr—can be used by students to share their critical thoughts in various formats, such as videos, images, podcasts, and narratives (Baker & Ryalls, 2016). Thus, effective technological integration in feminist online instruction can empower students to achieve a meaningful and rewarding learning experience, as indicated in social networking, collaborative learning, active learning, reflective learning, and becoming agents of social change. As Mishra and Koehler (2006) argued, the integration of new technologies can disrupt the equilibrium among these three components. With the development of digital technologies in education, there is a need to reconsider the effectiveness of professional development that exists for educators in enhancing their relevant competence, especially the ability to use technology for feminist pedagogy and content. The training programs that separate technology from pedagogy and content are not effective. Therefore, guided by the TPACK framework, professional development for educators should be context specific to address the complex relationships among technology, pedagogy, and content.
Discussions and Implications, Challenges and Opportunities
The TPACK framework creates new possibilities for educators to understand better the complicated phenomenon of technological integration into feminist pedagogy in multidisciplinary contexts. However, instructors are likely to experience additional challenges while adopting FP-based teaching practices in classrooms. For instance, the effectiveness of feminist teaching can vary based on different disciplines. It might be difficult for instructors in science, technology, and engineering disciplines to adopt FP-based teaching techniques in their classrooms (Herman & Kirkup, 2017). Moreover, instructors can face pressure for distracting students’ attention from the main course content and experiencing misunderstanding and resistance from students. Sometimes instructors might notice that their teaching plans do not work as expected in online education (Richards, 2013). In this circumstance, they need to explain why the course was designed based on feminist theory and the expectations of students at the beginning of the course. Moreover, institutions need to provide faculty development opportunities to train and engage faculty in innovative pedagogical and technological knowledge. Instructors can also collaborate with instructional designers to ensure that course materials, assessments, and tools are aligned with desired learning outcomes, such as critical thinking, problem solving, and teamwork.
FP-based teaching is reliant on the use of digital technologies (Aneja, 2017). In addition to the challenges of integrating technologies into online instruction, educators face difficulties in dealing with digital divides, surveillance, cyberbullying, accessibility, and other ethical concerns in online learning environments (Hawkins, 2016). With the popularity of digital devices, students—especially historically under-represented populations—still face technical barriers and digital divides at various levels, from internet connections, access to technology, and usability to online participation. As a result, institutions need to provide support services to address these divides, such as facilities, devices, and technical assistance. They can also develop training on digital skills for students—such as digital literacy, cybersecurity, and data privacy—to use technologies safely and effectively (Hawkins, 2016). In some situations, instructors can consider creating private groups on social networking sites for course projects to protect students’ privacy.
The success of FP-oriented teaching also depends heavily on the active participation of learners. Online education can encourage student participation in online discussions; however, authenticity and equal power dynamics are missing in online discussions. Sometimes the use of technology can even reinforce injustices and power imbalances (Richards, 2013). Therefore, instructors can face challenges in making online discussions organic and meaningful. To solve this problem, educators can divide a large class into small groups in which students have more opportunities to interact with each other and raise their voices. Instructors can act as online facilitators to provide clear instructions with a list of structured reflective questions to spark authentic and critical dialogues among students.
Moreover, in terms of the special characteristics of online instruction, students can easily feel isolated and excluded. Instructors can consider distributing online surveys or Google Forms to understand the needs of their students on a regular basis (Denial, 2021). In this way, instructors can offer contextualized learning support, meaningful networking, and mentoring opportunities to foster student participation and agency in online communities (Köseoğlu, 2020). Besides, instructors can work with multimedia developers and specialists to increase the accessibility and usability of instructional materials to accommodate the various needs of learners.
Future Research Directions
Further empirical research is needed to explore the application of these technological practices guided by the feminist TPACK framework in various teaching contexts and disciplinary fields, such as higher education, workforce training, and science-related fields. Other scholars can consider investigating the effectiveness of immersive technologies—such as simulations, virtual reality, and digital games—in enhancing feminist-oriented teaching in online education. Feminist educators can further study the application of these feminist-based pedagogical and technological strategies to engage and empower students with diverse backgrounds in online courses, such as non-traditional learners, adult learners, and students with different learning abilities.
Conclusion
Feminist pedagogy as a liberatory teaching practice creates new possibilities to build a safe and supportive online learning community. Students can engage in critical discussions to develop a conceptual understanding of discipline knowledge and essential soft skills, such as critical thinking, problem solving, teamwork, and power negotiation. Moreover, FP is not only a teaching practice but also a motivational tool that raises critical consciousness and promotes active involvement (Cannizzo, 2021). Online learning indicates a feminist value in providing marginalized students with opportunities to access quality education (Bailey, 2017). The integration of FP into online education can maintain online teaching and learning excellence. However, limited resources are available to guide instructors to apply feminist practices in online classrooms. I have discussed considerations and recommendations for technological integration into a feminist-oriented online teaching context through the lens of the TPACK framework. With the implementation of context-specific interventions, feminist-based pedagogical and technological knowledge can play a crucial role in supporting the effectiveness of feminist online teaching. The introduction of examples of technology for achieving collaborative learning and agents of social change can contribute to the field of feminist pedagogy and faculty development. I have also aimed to encourage more educators to acknowledge the benefits of feminist pedagogy and adopt it in their teaching contexts to engage and empower generations of students.
Key Takeaways
- Feminist pedagogy is a democratic way of teaching that can be used as a guide to develop a transformative online learning community to empower students and to make positive social changes in multidisciplinary fields.
- The TPACK framework can lay a theoretical foundation for interplay among three components: content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and technological knowledge.
- A feminist-oriented TPACK framework can further enrich the knowledge in feminist pedagogy, technological integration, and faculty development, especially content, pedagogical, and technological considerations needed for developing and delivering feminist-informed online courses.
- Educators can apply various tools, teaching strategies, and implications to promote online feminist teaching excellence in achieving collaborative learning and active learning for social change.
References
- Afifi, M. K., & Alamri, S. S. (2014). Effective principles in designing e-course in light of learning theories. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 15(1),
128–142. https://
doi .org /10 .17718 /tojde .43806 - Alexander, S. M., & Sapra, S. (2014). “Post it on the wall!”: Using Facebook to complement student learning in gender and women’s studies courses. Feminist
Teacher, 23(2), 142–157. https://
doi .org /10 .5406 /femteacher .23 .2 .0142 - Amanova, C. (2021). Feminist pedagogy in digital spaces: Brief systematic literature review. Distance Learning, 18(3), 23–29.
- Aneja, A. (2017). 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 - Bailey, C. (2017). Online feminist pedagogy: A new doorway into our brick-and -mortar classrooms? Feminist Teacher, 27(2–3), 253–266. https://
doi .org /10 .5406 /femteacher .27 .2 -3 .0253 - Baker, A. A., & Ryalls, E. (2016). Technologizing feminist pedagogy: Using blog activism in the gender studies classroom. Feminist Teacher, 25(1), 23–38.
- Cannizzo, H. A. (2021). Implementing feminist language pedagogy: Development of students’
critical consciousness and L2 writing. Education Sciences, 11(8), Article 393, 1–15. https://
doi .org /10 .3390 /educsci11080393 - 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 - Dahya, N., Jenson, J., & Fong, K. (2017). (En)gendering videogame development: A feminist approach to gender, education, and game studies. The Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 39(4), 367–390.
- Denial, C. J. (2021). Historical practices: Feminism, pedagogy, and a pandemic. Journal of Women’s History, 33(1), 134–139. https://
doi .org /10 .1353 /jowh .2021 .0006 - DeSpain, J. (2016). A feminist digital humanities pedagogy beyond the classroom. Transformations: The Journal of Inclusive Scholarship and Pedagogy, 26(1), 64–73. https://
doi .org /10 .1353 /tnf .2016 .0013 - Dhala, M., & Johnson, S. (2021). Taking bell hooks on Zoom: Embodying feminist pedagogy in a graduate theological classroom. Teaching Theology Religion, 24(3),
165–174. https://
doi /org /10 .1111 /teth .12593 - Fox, K., & Ebada, Y. (2022). Egyptian female podcasters: Shaping feminist identities. Learning, Media and Technology, 47(1), 53–64. https://
doi .org /10 .1080 /17439884 .2021 .2020286 - Giordano, S. (2016). Building new bioethical practices through feminist pedagogies. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, 9(1), 81–103. https://
doi .org /10 .3138 /ijfab .9 .1 .81 - Grissom-Broughton, P. A. (2020). A matter of race and gender: An examination of an undergraduate music program through the lens of feminist pedagogy and Black feminist pedagogy.
Research Studies in Music Education, 42(2), 160–176. https://
doi .org /10 .1177 /1321103X19863250 - Hawkins, T. L. (2016). “Can you tweet that?”: Twitter in the classroom. Feminist Teacher, 25(2–3), 153–168. https://
doi .org /10 .5406 /femteacher .25 .2 -3 .0153 - Hensel, L., Drake, M. A., & Young, V. A. (2017). The fiber arts in a women’s studies curriculum—A case study. Feminist Teacher, 28(1), 17–31. https://
doi .org /10 .5406 /femteacher .28 .1 .0017 - 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 - Hess, A., & Macomber, K. (2021). “My parents never read my papers, but they watched my film”: Documentary filmmaking as feminist pedagogy. Gender and Education,
33(3), 306–321. https://
doi .org /10 .1080 /09540253 .2020 .1763921 - Hill, A. M., & Weiger, S. (2021). Remaking relationships: Renewing the college
“family” course through collaborative, feminist pedagogy. Pedagogy, 21(1), 179–191. https://
doi .org /10 .1215 /15314200 -8692788 - hooks, b. (2003). Teaching community: A pedagogy of hope. Routledge.
- Hutchinson, L., & Novotny, M. (2018). Teaching a critical digital literacy of wearables: A feminist surveillance as care pedagogy. Computers and Composition, 50,
105–120. https://
doi .org /10 .1016 /j .compcom .2018 .07 .006 - Jarvis, C. (2020). Fiction as feminist pedagogy: An examination of curriculum and teaching strategies embodied in the novel. Studies in Continuing Education, 42(1),
118–132. https://
doi .org /10 .1080 /0158037X .2019 .1572601 - Jespersen, T. C. (2014). Literary identification as transformative feminist pedagogy. Feminist Teacher, 24(3), 221–228. https://
doi .org /10 .5406 /femteacher .24 .3 .0221 - Kimberly, C. (2014). Zine-making as feminist pedagogy. Feminist Teacher, 24(3), 155–168. https://
doi .org /10 .5406 /femteacher .24 .3 .0155 - Köseoğlu, S. (2020). Access as pedagogy: A case for embracing feminist pedagogy in open and distance learning. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1),
277–290. https://
doi .org /10 .5281 /zenodo .3893260 - Malazita, J. W., & Resetar, K. (2019). Infrastructures of abstraction: How computer science education produces anti-political subjects. Digital Creativity, 30(4),
300–312. https://
doi .org /10 .1080 /14626268 .2019 .1682616 / - Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://
doi .org /10 .1111 /j .1467 -9620 .2006 .00684 .x - Montgomery, B. L. (2018). Building and sustaining diverse functioning networks using social media and digital platforms to improve diversity and inclusivity. Frontiers in Digital
Humanities, 5(22), 1–11. https://
doi .org /10 .3389 /fdigh .2018 .00022 - Moore, J. L., Dickson-Deane, C., & Galyen, K. (2011). E-learning, online learning, and distance learning environments: Are they the same? The Internet and Higher Education,
14(2), 129–135. https://
doi .org /10 .1016 /j .iheduc .2010 .10 .001 - Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Kemp, J. E., & Kalman, H. (2010). Designing effective instruction. John Wiley & Sons.
- Murray, J., Byrne, D., & Koenig-Visagie, L. (2013). Teaching gender studies via open and distance learning in South Africa. Distance Education, 34(3), 339–352. https://
doi .org /10 .1080 /01587919 .2013 .835775 - Musil, C. (2008). Feminist pedagogy: Middle aged and still transforming classrooms. On Campus with Women, 37(2), 3.
- Redmond, P., Heffernan, A., Abawi, L., Brown, A., & Henderson, R. (2018). An online engagement
framework for higher education. Online Learning, 22(1), 183–204. https://
doi .org /10 .24059 /olj .v22i1 .1175 - Richards, R. S. (2013). “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 - Ringrose, J. (2018). Digital feminist pedagogy and post-truth misogyny. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(5), 647–656. https://
doi .org /10 .1080 /13562517 .2018 .1467162 - Roman, T. A. (2020). Supporting the mental health of teachers in COVID-19 through trauma-informed educational practices and adaptive formative assessment tools. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28(2), 473–481.
- Rosenblum, L. M., & Harris, L. (2019). Passing through: Feminist digital pedagogy and failure in the general education classroom. Transformations: The Journal of Inclusive
Scholarship and Pedagogy, 29(1), 30–48. https://
doi .org /10 .1353 /tnf .2019 .0002 - Rouhani, L. (2019). Using digital storytelling as a source of empowerment for rural women in Benin. Gender & Development, 27(3), 573–586. https://
doi .org /10 .1080 /13552074 .2019 .1664140 - Shackelford, J. (1992). Feminist pedagogy: A means for bringing critical thinking and creativity to the economics classroom. The American Economic Review, 82(2), 570–576.
- Springgay, S., & Zaliwska, Z. (2017). Learning to be affected: Matters of pedagogy in the artists’ soup kitchen. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(3),
273–283. https://
doi .org /10 .1080 /00131857 .2016 .1216385 - Vakil, S. (2020). “I’ve always been scared that someday I’m going to sell out”: Exploring the relationship between political identity and learning in
computer science education. Cognition and Instruction, 38(2), 87–115. https://
doi .org /10 .1080 /07370008 .2020 .1730374 - Vivakaran, M. V., & Maraimalai, N. (2017). Feminist pedagogy and social media: A study on their integration and effectiveness in training budding women entrepreneurs. Gender and
Education, 29(7), 869–889. https://
doi .org /10 .1080 /09540253 .2016 .1225008 - Wingo, N. P., Ivankova, N. V., & Moss, J. A. (2017). Faculty perceptions about teaching online: Exploring the literature using the technology acceptance model as an organizing
framework. Online Learning, 21(1), 15–35. https://
doi .org /10 .24059 /olj .v21i1 .761