Women’s Ways of Knowing is a theory by Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, Tarule (1986) that reflects on the work of Gilligan and Perry and emerged through research that encompassed a very broad demographic of women. This theory is based on in-depth interviews with 135 women about their self image, moral dilemmas, relationships of importance, education and learning, visions for the future, and perceived catalysts for change (Belenky et al., 1986). Based on the interviews, some common themes among the women emerged and became the five epistemologies of Women’s Ways of Knowing.
The theory consists of five groups, advancing from the most basic form of thought and intellect to the most complex. The first epistemology is “women of silence.” These women lack a voice of their own, conduct very little or no internal dialogue, and typically grew up disconnected from the community. The next epistemology is “women of received knowledge.” These women are completely dependent on others for knowledge (Belenky et al., 1986). The third group, “subjective knowers,” believes truth is in personal experience (Evans, 2010). Many of these women have experienced sexual abuse (Belenky et al., 1986). “Procedural knowers” are at the next level of knowing and these women believe each of us looks at the world through a different lens. They rely on a combination of intuition and external authorities for answers. The last of the epistemologies, “constructed knowledge,” integrates intuitive knowledge with learned knowledge from others. These women have developed a personal narrative, do not loose voice while listening to others, and use themselves to rise to new ways of thinking (Belenky et al., 1986).
Example of How it’s Been Used in Higher Ed.The Women’s Ways of Knowing theory has been used as a means to improve curriculum design, instruction, and techniques in educating women at the college level. Women need colleges that will set them free to find their own voice. In this move toward freedom, women need a great amount of support, but they often are too nurtured in higher-education and may actually benefit from a more impersonal approach (Belenky et al., 1986). This would challenge women to be more responsible, independent and active in their learning process. Women students need opportunities to see professors (male and female) fail in their abilities to solve problems. Women need to see models of thinking as human, imperfect and achievable.
Annotated Bibliography
Nah, Y. (2003). Contextual influences on women’s identities and leadership styles. Asian Journal of Women’s Studies, 9(4), 69. Retrieved from the ProQuest database.
Nay conducted research on five Korean women leaders in male-dominated professions. The research applied Belenky et al.’s theory of Women’s Way of Knowing by conducting a series of three interviews about their backgrounds, career profiles and experience overcoming gender-based discrimination. The study had two main goals 1) to challenge the belief that women’s identities and leadership styles are primarily relation-conscious based, and 2) to challenge the role of gender as the primarily determinant (over age, ethnicity, socioeconomic level, educational experiences and power) of a woman’s thought and behavior. The study found that you cannot generalize women. The context in which the women lived had a much greater correlation of their leadership styles, thoughts and behaviors than their gender. I found this article helpful in targeting a very specific population, but it was limited by a lack of randomness. Participants volunteered themselves after being informed of the goals of the study.
References
Belenky, M.F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N.R., Tarule, J.M. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: The development of self voice and mind. New York: Basic Books Inc.
Evans, N.J., Forney, D.S., Guido, F., Patton, L.D., & Renn, K.A. (2010). Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice. 2nd Edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Nah, Y. (2003). Contextual influences on women’s identities and leadership styles. Asian Journal of Women’s Studies, 9(4), 69. Retrieved from the ProQuest database.
