For her final project as part of the Doyle
Undergraduate Program, Emily Coccia conducted interviews with Georgetown
faculty members to explore new paradigms for how to
teach diversity.
Background: On March 2, 2015, Emily Coccia, an undergraduate fellow in the Doyle Engaging Difference Program and member of the Georgetown
College class of 2015, interviewed Julia Watts Belser, who joined the
Georgetown faculty in 2014 as a professor in the Theology Department. Professor
Belser works in Jewish Studies, with a focus in Talmud, rabbinic literature,
and Jewish ethics. Her research brings ancient texts into conversation with
disability studies, queer theory, feminist thought, and environmental ethics.
An ordained rabbi, Belser also writes queer feminist Jewish theology
and brings disability culture into conversation with Jewish tradition. In this
interview, she discusses her experiences teaching, reflecting on the challenges
and joys of working to create a deliberately inclusive classroom atmosphere.
In your work on
classical Judaism, you’ve managed to integrate disabilities studies, queer
theory, and feminist thought, among other critical theories. I saw this effort
come through quite obviously in your class, “Judaism and Gender,” but I’m
curious about some of your other courses, especially those that are less
obviously focused on an issue like gender. How have you worked to destabilize
the canon and bring in these theories that often seem not to have an accepted
place outside of the twenty-first century?
It’s certainly easier in a course like “Judaism and Gender”
where the focus is on the intersection between these two identities, though we
also brought in issues of sexuality and ethnicity too. Yet even in “Jewish
Sages and Sinners,” I have found that I can easily integrate these same sorts
of questions of intersectionality and diversity, touching on questions of
gender, disability, race, and class, among others. One way I’ve worked to bring
in new voices is by not using textbooks; this way of structuring my syllabus
gives me more flexibility in shaping the class. Sometimes it’s difficult to
find readings for an introductory-level course that both introduce students to
the field of Jewish studies and also open the door to larger conversations on
something like gender or sexuality.
In an introductory
course where students may not expect issues of diversity, how do you structure
the class to help ensure that students treat all material with the same level
of respect?
On the first day of class, I’m very upfront about what the
class will cover over the course of the semester. I also hand out a detailed
syllabus and organize my classes in units, which can build on and inform things
that have happened or will happen in the course. For instance, I have a unit on
gender, which allows us to fully delve into the conversation, rather than
having a token “gender day” tacked on at the end of the semester. During this
unit, we talk about the new material we’re reading, but also reflect back on
what we’ve done so far. As the semester goes on, I hope that students bring
this new paradigm with them and use it to inform future readings. It has been
wonderful to see how excited students get to make those sorts of connections
later in the semester.
You mentioned that you
have been able to bring in questions of race, ethnicity, and class. How have
you introduced these questions into your class?
Historically, there has been a significant conversation on
Judaism and race, including questions about whether Judaism is an ethnicity or
a race. Many students tend to assume that Jews are white, which actually allows
me an entrance into a discussion on the social construction of race. We can ask
what’s at stake for Jews in claiming a certain racial identity. These
conversations help destabilize the idea of Judaism as a monolithic identity
group, which often happens to minority groups. While questions of gender and
sexuality certainly do this, so do discussions on race and class. In addition
to illuminating the presence of normative identities within the Jewish
community, we also have conversations on topics like the Jewish involvement in
the Civil Rights Movement. This year, we were able to have a very productive
discussion on Ferguson and how many Jews have been involved in calls for
justice there. Being able to engage with contemporary issues provides the basis
for a discussion of how and when the Jewish community has and has not engaged
with social justice movements.
These topics all
sounds fascinating, and in our class, I think we definitely engaged with many
areas of intersectionality in a respectful way. Have you encountered any real
difficulties in having some of these conversations?
This year I taught “Problem of God,” and in my class, I
focused on gender, sexuality, and the body. As a required class, I was aware
that some students might feel like they were being forced to engage with
difference. So like I mentioned earlier, I made it as clear as possible that we
would be talking about these sorts of issues on day one when students still had
the freedom to leave the course during add/drop. I prefer to avoid the “shock
factor,” instead opting to let students know what’s coming. It certainly
doesn’t solve all problems, but it helps avoid catching students of guard.
Once the course has started, I aim to structure
conversations so that students recognize that there are multiple approaches.
For instance, when we talk about gender, we look at a variety of feminist
activists to see how they have each thought and reshaped their religious
communities. In a class like “Problem of God,” I didn’t want a debate, so I
framed the class as a study of what others have done and thought.
Regardless of
a your personal views, you can still identify the stakes and arguments of an
issue. In this way, it becomes more a study of social movements than an
argument leading to value judgments. I’m much more interested in exposing
students to existing views from those involved, especially those who identify
with the specific communities we’re discussing. The students have an obligation
to understand and see what it matters, but not to share their own views. While
they often do contribute personal stories or views, structuring the class in this
way takes off the pressure. I never want minority views to feel threatened, so
if discussion is all going one way, I’ll ask if someone can think of an argument
on the other side. It doesn’t have to be what they think, but it’s a way of
really understanding the nuances of both sides of an issue.
They all sound like
great strategies. Finally, and you’ve touched on it a bit already, what have
you found to be most rewarding about this style of teaching and creating a
diverse syllabus and inclusive classroom atmosphere?
It’s always great to have students return and tell me that
this class was meaningful to them in some way. It matters to have spaces,
especially classrooms, where this kind of material and these questions are
central; it creates a vibrant community and class discussion. Hearing from
students—both in the classroom and after the course ends—gives me a sense of
why this work of education matters so much. I see education as an experience of
critical consciousness and hope to bring that vision to my students through my
work.