P. Taylor Webb
Relevant Degree Programs
Complete these steps before you reach out to a faculty member!
- Familiarize yourself with program requirements. You want to learn as much as possible from the information available to you before you reach out to a faculty member. Be sure to visit the graduate degree program listing and program-specific websites.
- Check whether the program requires you to seek commitment from a supervisor prior to submitting an application. For some programs this is an essential step while others match successful applicants with faculty members within the first year of study. This is either indicated in the program profile under "Requirements" or on the program website.
- Identify specific faculty members who are conducting research in your specific area of interest.
- Establish that your research interests align with the faculty member’s research interests.
- Read up on the faculty members in the program and the research being conducted in the department.
- Familiarize yourself with their work, read their recent publications and past theses/dissertations that they supervised. Be certain that their research is indeed what you are hoping to study.
- Compose an error-free and grammatically correct email addressed to your specifically targeted faculty member, and remember to use their correct titles.
- Do not send non-specific, mass emails to everyone in the department hoping for a match.
- Address the faculty members by name. Your contact should be genuine rather than generic.
- Include a brief outline of your academic background, why you are interested in working with the faculty member, and what experience you could bring to the department. The supervision enquiry form guides you with targeted questions. Ensure to craft compelling answers to these questions.
- Highlight your achievements and why you are a top student. Faculty members receive dozens of requests from prospective students and you may have less than 30 seconds to peek someone’s interest.
- Demonstrate that you are familiar with their research:
- Convey the specific ways you are a good fit for the program.
- Convey the specific ways the program/lab/faculty member is a good fit for the research you are interested in/already conducting.
- Be enthusiastic, but don’t overdo it.
G+PS regularly provides virtual sessions that focus on admission requirements and procedures and tips how to improve your application.
*Education policy, especially enactments and problematizations *Governmentality studies in education, particularly micropolitics and subjectivities *Methodological uses of 'fieldwork in philosophy' and post-qualitative approaches
Graduate Student Supervision
Master's Student Supervision (2010 - 2018)
The purpose of this study is to identify the assumptions of China’s civic education and compare these assumptions to the key concepts involved in Paulo Freire’s critical pedagogy, particularly his ideas of (1) critical consciousness, (2) humanization, and (3) dialogue. Based on the specific social and political contexts in which each of these pedagogies arose, the thesis will explore the limitations and potential of applying Freire’s critical pedagogy to enhance university students’ critical and civic consciousness in China.To this end, the thesis will present a comparative study of Freirean critical pedagogy and the Chinese culture of pedagogy in order to explore the following questions: What are the key concepts that support Freire’s conception of transformative education? What are the key concepts of China’s civic education? How do Freire’s and China’s concepts relate or compare to each other? How might Freirean ideas of critical consciousness and social transformation be informed or extended in relation to the challenges posed by China’s conception of civic education? What challenges or implications arise when attempting to use or implement Freire’s ideas of critical pedagogy within China’s higher education system (e.g., to teach for transformation)?These questions will be answered by exploring the points of commonality and difference between the worldviews framing the civic education in China’s higher education institutions and Freire’s critical pedagogy.
This study focuses on a single school district as a site of concept-building in relation to teachers’ subjective experiences of power vis à vis a neoliberal policy regime. The assemblage of teachers’ subjectivities takes place in the context of the Southeastern United States, in a policy environment highly influenced by neoliberal ideology. The study focuses on the South Carolina School Report Card Policy (part of No Child Left Behind) as an instantiation of neoliberal education policy and draws on a Foucauldian and Deleuzian framework for understanding how power produces teachers’ subjectivities with and through policy. The researcher orients this work as a fieldwork in philosophy in order to think about power with teachers in the situated contexts of their lives in a unique school district; this study therefore generalizes to theory rather than to people or location. The research concludes that power a/effected teachers’ subjectivities through disciplinary technologies and the creation and maintenance of affective channels, having bodily and material impacts on teachers, and causing them to find ‘the other’ of students’ bodies, which have been raced, classed, and gendered, in themselves.
This study made use of content and discourse analysis to critically examine how the ideas of ‘good teaching’ and ‘good teachers’ were developed and used within the policy-document A Vision for 21st Century Education. Released in 2010 by British Columbia’s Premier’s Technology Council, A Vision for 21st Century Education is a localized policy that attempts to re-imagine key features of teachers and their work in ways that are consistent with the goals of the larger 21st-century policy agenda currently circulating the world. Through my use of content and discourse analysis, I show how A Vision for 21st Century Education promotes a vision of schooling that is largely a neoliberal and managerialist enterprise that relegates teachers and teaching to subordinate roles within processes of policy development and policy implementation. The study identifies two prominent discourses within A Vision for 21st Century Education: ‘learnification’ translates and reduces public education to terms of ‘learners’ and ‘learning,’ and ‘accountingization’ re-imagines teachers’ work as ‘that which can be counted.’ I take care to show how these discourses (i) are developed within the text through genre and style, modalization and passivation; and (ii) subordinate teachers beneath the values of policy makers. I argue that this relative devaluation of teachers and their work provides a basis for increased school conflicts, contributes to elevated stress among teachers, and may encourage teacher ‘burnout.’ As a point of contrast, I sketch an alternative vision of the role of teachers’ work that is grounded in democratic values and practices.
This study examined how feelings about report cards, motivation (interest in doing wellin school) and depth curiosity (interest in learning beyond what is required to achieve agrade) were affected by achievement and the importance placed on report cards by students.Ninety-seven students (Grade 4 & Grade 7) in a multicultural elementary school in westernCanada were surveyed to determine their attitudes towards report cards. Data wereexamined using descriptive and inferential statistics in SPSS. Assertions were developedusing the qualitative data.High-achieving female students reported being less curious and high-achieving malestudents more curious than their lower-achieving peers of the same gender. These effectscancelled each other out in the whole population, and were possibly caused by gender-baseddifferences in anxiety about reports, but more likely due to different approaches to learning.A similar, but weaker, gender-based relationship between importance indicators andcuriosity indicators was found.Motivation (wanting to make an effort after seeing report card grades) was uncorrelatedwith importance and achievement for all groups. Possible causes included differences inexpectations, home attitudes, and the circumstances of ESL (English as second language)learners.The open-ended questions were used to develop three assertions about students’reactions to report cards. Grade 7 students were much more aware of the social context ofreports than Grade 4 students. Grade 7 boys were much more likely to report severe parentalreactions and to evaluate themselves negatively than Grade 7 girls. Finally, feelings werelargely independent of the actual grades obtained.Suggested directions for future research include a longitudinal study, taking grade-expectationsinto account. Repeating the current study at schools with differentdemographics is also suggested. An ethnographic study looking at different social cohortscould also be informative. A large-scale study to confirm the methods used to measurecuriosity is also recommended.Recommendations for teachers, parents, and policy makers were developed. These focuson mitigating the harmful effects of letter grades, and approaching change in a thoughtfulway. Suggestions for improving dialogue between parents and teachers on the topics ofcuriosity, gender, and letter grades were also developed.