Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-21T05:57:36.602Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false


Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 May 2013

Amy L. Atchison*
Valparaiso University


Recommendation 5: That the character and implications of ethnic, gender, and cultural diversity and the international and transnational dimensions of particular problems and policies be addressed in all relevant courses—“main-streamed,” in the pedagogical vernacular—not treated as a separate and unique problem to be dealt with in a particular course or two or by a particular faculty member. (Wahlke 1991, 53; emphasis in original)

The idea for this Critical Perspectives section came from a short course at the 2011 American Political Science Association Annual Meeting, “Teaching Gender and Politics: Views from the Field.” In one of the panel discussions, a senior feminist international relations scholar mentioned the above-quoted Wahlke Report, and most participants—almost all of whom identify as gender scholars, many of whom are senior in the field—were surprised not only that APSA recommended gender mainstreaming in the political science classroom, but also that it happened so long ago. Despite this now twenty-year-old recommendation, the available data on gender mainstreaming indicate that gender as a powerful theoretical and analytical construct remains outside the mainstream of political science education (Cassese, Bos, and Duncan 2012). It is illustrative to note that our workshop participants were not the only political scientists who seem to have missed Wahlke's recommendation on inclusion of gender and ethnicity; it was not highlighted in either the immediate aftermath of the publication of the report or in more recent evaluations of the report's influence (Bennett 1991; Ishiyama 2005; Ishiyama, Breuning, and Lopez 2006; Kaufman-Osborn 1991). Given the many benefits of gender mainstreaming—from improving democratic citizenship to increasing the number of women in the profession—our goal for this Critical Perspectives section is to bring renewed focus to the subject of gender mainstreaming in political science education. We hope to start new conversations: What are the benefits of mainstreaming? How can faculty approach mainstreaming? What tools do faculty need in order to mainstream effectively? In the following essays, the authors approach these questions from a variety of viewpoints.

Critical Perspectives on Gender and Politics
Copyright © The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)



Bennett, Douglas C. 1991. “Political Science within the Liberal Arts: Towards Renewal of Our Commitment.” PS: Political Science & Politics 24 (2): 201–4.Google Scholar
Cassese, Erin C., Bos, Angela L., and Duncan, Lauren E.. 2012. “Integrating Gender into the Political Science Core Curriculum.” PS: Political Science & Politics 45 (2): 238–43.Google Scholar
Ishiyama, John. 2005. “Examining the Impact of the Wahlke Report: Surveying the Structure of the Political Science Curricula at Liberal Arts and Sciences Colleges and Universities in the Midwest.” PS: Political Science & Politics 38 (1): 7175.Google Scholar
Ishiyama, John, Breuning, Marijke, and Lopez, Linda. 2006. “A Century of Continuity and (Little) Change in the Undergraduate Political Science Curriculum.” The American Political Science Review 100 (4): 659–65.Google Scholar
Kaufman-Osborn, Timothy V. 1991. “From the Science to the Art of Politics.” PS: Political Science & Politics 24 (2): 204–5.Google Scholar
Wahlke, John C. 1991. “Liberal Learning and the Political Science Major: A Report to the Profession.” PS: Political Science & Politics 24 (1): 4860.Google Scholar