Conference Program

Although sociology became institutionalised in the nineteenth century within industrial and patriarchal societies (Jedlowski, 2009), women actively contributed to its early theoretical, methodological, and empirical development (McDonald, 1994). However, as the disciplinary canon took shape - privileging predominantly male figures (Deegan, 1991) - their contributions were marginalised according to a logic of “gender and knowledge politics” (Lengermann and Niebrugge, 1998). Sociology thus constructed its presumed epistemological neutrality from a male standpoint, removing gender as a foundational category (Arango, 2005).

Since the 1970s, a systematic rediscovery of the Early Women Sociologists (EWS) has taken place (Santagati et al., 2023), progressively expanding beyond the Anglophone context and reconstructing a more inclusive genealogy of the discipline. Much of this recovery has been promoted by scholars working within academia, who have conducted archival research, edited volumes, and revised university curricula.

This study explores the pedagogical implications of this canon revision by asking: what is the effect on university teaching of the recent introduction of the EWS into sociology programmes? Beyond adding new content, does their inclusion reshape teachers’ professional agency, emotional engagement, and capacity to enact inclusive and democratic pedagogies?

An international literature review identified 106 scholars specialising in the EWS. An online survey explored their research-teaching activities and professional networks. Network-analysis items enabled the identification of 13 key professors involved in disseminating EWS scholarship. These professors (from Spain, Italy, Mexico, Colombia, Brazil, and the United States) were interviewed through semi-structured interviews, including a section devoted to teaching practices and professional experiences.

Preliminary findings highlight three main dimensions. First, the EWS articulated a conception of the subject as situated and particularised rather than abstract. This epistemological orientation appears to foster more inclusive pedagogical approaches attentive to lived experience and social positioning. Professors report strong processes of identification with these authors, describing how teaching their texts enhances their sense of professional meaning and reflexivity. This emotional involvement supports their capacity to sustain participatory learning environments.

Second, students similarly display processes of identification, recognising elements of their everyday experiences in these texts, which are then reframed within a collective and theoretically grounded perspective. This results in at least three effects: (1) increased interest and enthusiasm for the discipline; (2) higher levels of emotional engagement and participation; and (3) the emergence of further educational demands.

Third, the introduction of the EWS appears to foster a rethinking of teaching practices among university lecturers. It is not merely a matter of adding new texts or new names to the syllabus, but of transforming the mode of teaching itself: the hierarchical dimension of the classroom is attenuated in favour of greater horizontality; circular seating arrangements are preferred; materials produced by the EWS (writings, letters, experience-based texts) are used to stimulate students’ sociological imagination.

In this sense, revising the canon becomes not only an epistemic intervention but also a professional and emotional resource for teachers. The classroom is reconfigured as a more inclusive and democratic space, where theory and lived experience interact and knowledge is co-constructed through participatory practices.