Re: Krupskaya

Martin Ryder (mryder who-is-at carbon.cudenver.edu)
Thu, 8 Apr 1999 13:05:17 -0600 (MDT)

Pursuing the philosophical lineage behind a given
intellectual phenomenon is for me one of the most
effective approaches for acquainting myself with
the culture that gave rise to the phenomenon. Sadly,
this scholastic approach is vulnerable to phallocentric
distortion since the feminine influence is rarely
committed to the historical record. The question
of intellectual history is inherently gender biased,
prompting Dianne to raise the question, "where are the
women?!"

A small exception in this current line of inquiry is
Krupskaya (thanks Mike!). Nadezhda K. Krupskaya
comes to us in the literature by means of her
relationship to Vladimir Ilich rather than the
pioneering paths she helped to lay down within Soviet
education. Finding the details of her influence is a
bit of challenge. We learn that she introduced project
methodology into Russian education. But an inquiry
into "project methodology" immediately returns us to the
phallocentric record citing the foundational ideas of
Kilpatrick and Dewey.

In Jay's words, "by asking what was missed when mostly
men wrote theoretical accounts of a practice conducted
by both men and women" we are likely to end up with
a much richer account. The challenge is to learn how
to incorporate this practice in our research.

Martin R.