Reply to comment

Julia,

I'm glad you brought up this point about locating oneself when writing an essay. I definitely noticed the lack of it in Anne's papers, yet decided not to comment given the attacking nature of the debate last week. Since you brought it up again, it would not hurt to talk about it again. =)

I think the paper is more persuasive as it is. Perhaps locating each of their connections to their respective fields would propel unnecessary objections that would detract from the essence of the argument that education should be interdisciplinary. In other words, if a reader disagreed with the way  Anne's values/beliefs/ideals about feminism played out in her  pedagoy, the reader would not get as much out of the essay. Let's just say there are some things better left unsaid.

It also would be out of place; I do not see how knowing each professor's personal connection could benefit the argument. As it is now, each professor retains an authority as professors of a top liberal arts college.

Additionally, the lack of mention of each academic perspective does not make a distinction between subjects; there is a sort of interdisciplinary ideal to the format of the paper that I find tremendously productive.

Lastly, I am confused by your question. You ask: "How are they as people connected to this subject?"

What is the difference between a person being connected to a subject and a professor being connected to a subject? I am not sure how significant the divide between personal life and professional life is for Anne or Grobstein or McCormack. For my future, I know that I would prefer a fluidity between the two "lives" and I would not make a distinction between one or the other; my personal life would be my professional life et vice versa. I think it would differ, though, depending on the field.  Are the two not synonomous for you?