The Weaknesses of Women’s Studies Programs

Feminist scholars argue whether feminism should be expanded away from

women’s studies or needs to have a main focus in order to do its work. After I weighed

both sides, I agree with Brown’s argument that feminism should be transformed into a

universal subject that can be studied in many fields. First, the curriculum for the women’s

studies program is not focused and not well grounded. Second, most women’s studies are

interdisciplinary programs, and they have weaknesses and problems that other

departments do not have. Third, deciding what courses should count for women’s studies.

The curriculum for this program is not focused and not well grounded in women’s

studies. The majority of the program’s courses are not from the program itself, but from

other departments. Unlike women’s studies, other departments have their own courses

and their own focuses. For instance, in the English department, there are no cross-listed

courses. An English major only takes courses from the department itself. The problem

with the women’s studies program because it contains a mix of disciplines such as

political science, philosophy, literature, history, sociology, cultural anthropology, and

music. For example, the XXXX College Catalog explains that the Women and Gender

Studies Program draws on the commitment and expertise of feminist scholars in more

than 15 academic departments for our wide range of course offerings (215). In XXXX

College, a student who majors in Women and Gender Studies is only required to take 3

women’s studies classes, and the remaining 5 classes may come from different

departments. The elective courses are so broad. Therefore, the central focus of the

program is not within the department itself.

In addition, most faculty who teach women’s studies also teach in different

departments. Brown says, “Almost all women’s studies programs rely on faculty and
curricular offerings in other departments, both because they are too small to do otherwise

and because of the proud interdisciplinary under girding the intellectual project of

women’s studies” (84). For instance, XXXX College catalog shows that there are 4

distinguished professors, 32 professors, 18 associate professors, and 4 assistant professors,

and they are all affiliated faculty (215). All of these professors teach women’s studies as

well as classes like English, political science, classics, psychology, philosophy, sociology,

anthropology, computer science, and economics. Because the women’s studies are

interdisciplinary programs, they have several weaknesses that other departments do not

have. First, women studies programs are not self-governing departments because they

have courses and faculty from various departments. The departments keep some of the

power to hire, fire, and schedule. Second, Students often have trouble getting courses

taught regularly. If the departments have other priorities, the program will lose faculty

member, who may not be replaced. Third, it is extremely difficult to have meetings with

faculty fully participated because faculty are from all different departments and time-

conflict must exist among them.

Generating a coherent and vigorous women’s studies program is almost

impossible because the courses from other departments do not closely relate to the

program. Most women’s studies programs constitute about twenty four to thirty credits.

Out of the twenty four to thirty credits, only six to nine credits are from other

departments. The majority of credits are electives. Therefore, it is very difficult to create

a good program because the questions of what to expect students who major in women’s

studies ought to know and what they should be trained are still unanswered. Due to the

fact that women’s studies is so broad, it should be no longer be considered as an object of

study and should not be feasible as a discipline.

 Deciding what courses should count for the program is very hard. Brown says,

“For many women’s studies programs, the deciding these things lead to some strange

curricular formations: Chaucer taught by one faculty member may count for women’s

studies, but not when it is taught by another…a students wants to know if her invertebrate

biology course, in which she focused intensely on biological discourses of mating, might

count and why not? (85). However, the XXXX catalog says that a biology course can

fulfill a Natural Science requirement as well as a Women and/or Issues of Gender

requirement in the General Education Requirement (97). Even though a biology course

may discuss the anatomical differences of sex, but it does not talk about the issues of

women or gender. The XXXX Catalog describes that the purposes of women studies are

to, “Make women’s contributions to the world’s knowledge and cultures…and create an

understanding of the ways in which gender intersects with race, religion, class, ethnicity,

ability and sexual orientation to shape all human experience, including the pursuit of

learning” (215). Analyzing reproduction and anatomical differences of sex are not even a

small part of women’s studies’ priority. If a biology course has nothing to do with issues

of women or gender, why does it fulfill the Women and/or Issues of Gender requirement

under Pluralism and Diversity?

Within the weakness of the women’s studies program, feminism should be

transformed into broad subject that can be learned in many fields. The majority numbers

of courses found in women’s studies programs can be found in other departments as well.

Therefore, the program should no longer be considered a single subject of study.