Nice Girls like Us: Confronting White Liberalism in Teacher Education and Ourselves
, Sophie Degener 2,*,†, Amy Tondreau 3,†, Wendy Gardiner 4,†, Tierney B. Hinman 5,†, Tess M. Dussling 6,†, Elizabeth Y. Stevens 7,†and Nance S. Wilson 8,†Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Dear Authors,
Thank you for the opportunity to review your work. I read it with interest and thought it had good potential for development for this special issue on whiteness and niceness. The authors organized the manuscript well. It was easy to follow. You referenced appropriate material (more would be welcome) and provided some useful resources at the end of the article.
My recommendations include: development, abstract, teaching voice, methodology, and supplemental resources. The APA is a bit awry, but that's easily addressable.
First, the abstract does not detail fully the work of the article. As I read, I realized the material emerges from a self-study (anti-racist) group of 8 people (leaders?) across the nation who have met monthly for 5 years and, as the writing shows later, wrote journals, and drew from that material for this article. And yet little of this info is included in the abstract and little in the article as well. This is an important and committed undertaking. why not say more? I also assumed the work would focus on the actions and thoughts of people writing the article, and their critical work with their niceness practices, rather than the teachers they supervise and support. I suggest developing the work on the leaders and revising the abstract to match the article.
Second, development. As a reader, I felt like I was missing key information throughout the article the authors need to teach and explain to diverse readers. Page 1 moves into the topic of niceness with very little detail about the nuances and use of niceness as a concept, how it manifests, how it differs from concepts of kindness, relationality, and varied other critical relational practices that are part of a curriculum of nonviolence in violent spaces of schools (particularly for students of color, see Necropolitics, Wozolek), or other scholarship that has applied it to teacher educators. Say more. The treatment of niceness is abrupt in that first page. How does niceness, as others theorize it, and you use it, uphold patriarchy? what do you mean by white liberalism? Please explain your sense of this before saying why its a problem. I believe you, but all readers need to read how you see these terms and concepts, why they are problematic, using a basic teaching voice (lines 55-58 as well).
There is very little attention to methodology, methods, how the study was carried out, or if its more of an informal reflection practice rather than an empirical study. Either is fine, but the reader would benefit from information about how your group began, now 5 years running, some general information about you as teachers/leaders (former teachers now leaders?) what are examples of some of the things you have read? what are the rhythms of the group, and the journal practices? Do you write each month, is it a diligent practice, or one that comes and goes, do you draw, talk into tape recorders, engage across pages, etc? How did you decide on these themes? In one sentence you mention "reading; I'm assuming this isn't an empirical study from this brief treatment, but even if it is informal, we need more information about the "journals", info about their content, and how you decided what mattered for this piece.
I became a little confused as I read; it started in a way that I assumed the leaders/teacher-leaders would be analyzing their own experiences...how they grappled with their own issues of white fragility...niceness...various white dynamics that emerge in the schools...that affects their roles and the material seemed to shift only to others. It seems to put white leaders in a position of distancing from practices that affect all white people in schools, in which we (white people) are all complicit. Did you already do this reflexive work in previous writings? If so, include some of this information.
Revisit and develop the examples you are using from classrooms to make them clear to diverse readers. I could not tell the context of the first example and all needed some more development (lines 161-170).
I appreciated the resources you included at the end of your article; would you like to include some readings you have done in your shared group?
Are the people involved in incidents you are using in this piece identifiable, given the identity of the authors? revisit these examples; consider whether any of the researcher's names need to be attached to these descriptions, and take care to shield details of incidents to protect those it represents.
Smaller things.
Line 28--ideology? what do you mean by this?
Line 30--suggest "they" delivered or "we" delivered
Line 107, anything more recent on white teachers?
Line 366--to what extent is this geography specific? I live in a state with a gag order and strict censorship policies; teachers have only so much control over what they can choose. they can certainly choose diverse authors but not necessarily diverse topics.
My suggestion is to share some of your own personal experiences with moments of niceness in your roles and wrestling with whiteness before shifting to others; this seems an important part of the overall work you are striving to do in your roles.
I hope these comments are helpful. I wish you good luck with your work!
Author Response
|
Reviewer Comments |
Line(s) in the Manuscript |
Completed Revisions |
|
We recommend the authors build on the background/literature review section. We agree with Reviewer #1 to further nuance Niceness, including how it is different from kindness, and relationality, how it upholds patriarchy, and how it relates to white liberalism. We also agree with Reviewer #3 to provide additional research supporting how women are perceived in academia. |
65-107 133-161 |
We expanded the literature review section so that our work builds on more relevant studies. We extended the theoretical framework to explain the differences between niceness, kindness, and white liberalism. We also highlighted the connection between niceness and upholding patriarchy. |
|
We further recommend you provide more details about your research design and methods. Both Reviewer #1 and Reviewer #3 note the importance of providing additional details about the data collection and analysis procedures. For example, share more about how your group began, how you all built trust, the number of meetings you had with one another, the readings and resources the group used to have discussions, your journal practices, and how you analyzed the journals to develop themes. The reviewers also recommend sharing more details about each of the teachers/leaders. We agree with this and recommend the authors include positionality statements, noting how your identities and experiences impact your relationship to the study. Reviewer #3 also recommends further defining a self-study and referencing similar studies on whiteness and teacher educators. |
216-259 91-107 249 (please insert Table 1.1 here) 187-208 195 (referenced similar self study research on whiteness and teacher education) |
Responding to Reviewers #1 and #3, we inserted a methods section with details about the self-study methodology and the methods for this article. This section includes the data collection and analysis procedures. We also shared details about the group’s formation. Table 1 (line 249) illustrates details about each of the teachers/leaders with positionality statements. In response to Reviewer #3, we defined a self-study community of practice (SSCoP) and referenced similar studies on whiteness and teacher educators. |
|
In addition, we agree with Reviewer #1 that the findings could be more reflective of the author’s experiences as teachers/leaders versus the experiences of their students. Reviewer #1 recommends including more about how the authors grappled with their own issues of white fragility, niceness, and backlash. |
344, 414 417-433, 467-473 |
We revised some of the findings that made sense to us to reflect students’ and our experiences as teachers/ leaders. Additionally, we expanded on how we grappled (and still grapple) with white fragility, niceness, and backlash. |
|
We appreciated the authors’ recommendations and resources for educators. In addition to these recommendations, please, share how the authors, as White women, intend to partner with and uplift their colleagues of color, particularly in leadership roles. |
502-526 474-518 |
We included paragraphs with examples of how we, as white women, will partner with and uplift colleagues of color, particularly those in leadership roles. |
Sincerely,
Authors
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
I like this article. It's well written, and the documentation of the teachers' journey is important. The article is well situated in current literature, and will be a contribution to the work of teacher development.
Author Response
Reviewer #2 did not suggest revisions. Therefore, we do not have feedback for this reviewer.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
I was very excited to discover the focus of this paper as I think the intersections of whiteness and femininity are pervasive in teacher education and really important and relevant to explore. Niceness is something that often binds teacher educators as well.
Some suggestions to further expand your work:
1. I think what is missing to some extent is a strong poststructural feminist teaching lens- this would be a helpful way to analyze your experiences and show some of the nuances and complexities of being white women teacher educators and oroblematize female whiteness and niceness.
2. I also feel like I wanted to know what research has already been done around these issues- a literature review would be helpful to provide a research context for the study beyond your theoretical framework. There is actually quite a bit of research about the ways in which students perceive their professors when they are women- and how they are either considered pushovers when they are nice or too rigid and "bitchy" when they are strict or difficult. I think you could draw from some of this work.
3. I applaud the authors for using a self-study methodology and because this is my expertise I think it would be helpful to further define what that is and then to reference the self-studies that have conducted around issues of whiteness and in particular white women teacher educators. These can be found in the Studying Teacher Education journal as well as the Handbooks.
4. I am curious about the relationship of the researchers and how they were able to establish a safe and generative reflective space together. How did you all navigate uncomfortable conversations?
5. At the moment, I feel like the findings feel preliminary- I wonder if there is a way to do a deeper dive and try to look at these experiences through a more nuanced and complex lens. Rather than throwing out niceness when does it benefit the teacher educator - where are the gray areas for this work. We want teacher educators to be empathetic and have strong caring relationships with their students= when is this appropriate and when does it get in the way or when is it misinterpreted?
6. Also what is the role of the white woman teacher educator in terms of being a co-conspirator with their colleagues of color? How do we forge these partnerships?
7. Also I am not sure about the lists at the end of the article- I think recommendations are important but these feel very broad sweeping to me!
8. Finally a hard APA 7th edit needs to be done!
Author Response
|
Reviewer Comments |
Line(s) in the Manuscript |
Completed Revisions |
|
We recommend the authors build on the background/literature review section. We agree with Reviewer #1 to further nuance Niceness, including how it is different from kindness, and relationality, how it upholds patriarchy, and how it relates to white liberalism. We also agree with Reviewer #3 to provide additional research supporting how women are perceived in academia. |
65-107 133-161 |
We expanded the literature review section so that our work builds on more relevant studies. We extended the theoretical framework to explain the differences between niceness, kindness, and white liberalism. We also highlighted the connection between niceness and upholding patriarchy. |
|
We further recommend you provide more details about your research design and methods. Both Reviewer #1 and Reviewer #3 note the importance of providing additional details about the data collection and analysis procedures. For example, share more about how your group began, how you all built trust, the number of meetings you had with one another, the readings and resources the group used to have discussions, your journal practices, and how you analyzed the journals to develop themes. The reviewers also recommend sharing more details about each of the teachers/leaders. We agree with this and recommend the authors include positionality statements, noting how your identities and experiences impact your relationship to the study. Reviewer #3 also recommends further defining a self-study and referencing similar studies on whiteness and teacher educators. |
216-259 91-107 249 (please insert Table 1.1 here) 187-208 195 (referenced similar self study research on whiteness and teacher education) |
Responding to Reviewers #1 and #3, we inserted a methods section with details about the self-study methodology and the methods for this article. This section includes the data collection and analysis procedures. We also shared details about the group’s formation. Table 1 (line 249) illustrates details about each of the teachers/leaders with positionality statements. In response to Reviewer #3, we defined a self-study community of practice (SSCoP) and referenced similar studies on whiteness and teacher educators. |
|
In addition, we agree with Reviewer #1 that the findings could be more reflective of the author’s experiences as teachers/leaders versus the experiences of their students. Reviewer #1 recommends including more about how the authors grappled with their own issues of white fragility, niceness, and backlash. |
344, 414 417-433, 467-473 |
We revised some of the findings that made sense to us to reflect students’ and our experiences as teachers/ leaders. Additionally, we expanded on how we grappled (and still grapple) with white fragility, niceness, and backlash. |
|
We appreciated the authors’ recommendations and resources for educators. In addition to these recommendations, please, share how the authors, as White women, intend to partner with and uplift their colleagues of color, particularly in leadership roles. |
502-526 474-518 |
We included paragraphs with examples of how we, as white women, will partner with and uplift colleagues of color, particularly those in leadership roles. |
Sincerely,
Authors
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The authors have thoroughly addressed the concerns raised in the review. I really like the resources they added.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
This manuscript is ready for publication.
