References
- Ainsaar, M., Soo, K., & Laur, T. (2010). Naiselikkuse ja mehelikkuse seos isikuoma-dustega 16–19-aastaste Eesti noorte seas [The relationship between femininity, masculinity and personal characteristics among 16–19-year-old Estonian youth]. Ariadne Lõng, 1/2, 57–74.
- Antikainen, A., Rinne, R., & Koski, L. (2009). Haridussotsioloogia [Educational sociology]. (M. Vinkel, Trans.) Tallinna Ülikool. (Original work published 2006).
- Beauvoir de, S. (1997). Teine sugupool [The second sex]. (M. Mauer & A. Tõnnov, Trans.) Vagabund. (Original work published 1949).
- Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture. London: Sage Publications.
- Connell, R.W. (2005). Masculinities (2nd ed.). Berkley & Los Angeles: University of California Press.
- Davies, B. (2006). Subjectification: the relevance of Butler’s analysis for education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 27 (4), 425–438, DOI:10.1080/01425690600802907
- Härkönen, U. (2004). Work education for sustainable development (WESD) in curricula and in the systems model. In Anneli and Marika Veisson (Eds.) Sustainable Development. Culture. Education. Articles in Early Childhood Education, (pp. 26–42). Tallinn Pedagogical University. Tallinn: TPŪ Kirjastus.
- Holm, A. S. (2010). Gender patterns and student agency: Secondary school students’ perceptions over time. European Educational Research Journal, 9 (2), 257–268.
- Huhta, L., & Meriläinen, R. (2008). Kilttien kapina [The rebellion of the good ones]. Helsinki: Edita.
- Johnsson-Latham, G. (2007). A study on gender equality as a prerequisite for sustainable development. Report to the Environment Advisory Council, Sweden.
- Kenway, J., & Fitzclarence, L. (2011). Masculinity, violence and schooling: Challenging “Poisonous pedagogies”. In C. Skelton and B. Francis (Eds). A Feminist Critique of Education. 15 years of gender education. London and New York: Routledge.
- Kuckartz, U. (2014). Three basic methods of qualitative text analysis. In Qualitative text analysis: A guide to methods, practice and using software. (pp. 65–121). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. DOI: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.tlu.ee/10.4135/9781446288719.n4
- Kuurme, T., Kasemaa, G., & Roots E-M. (2013). Poiste ja tüdrukute peab-pedagoogika [The must-do-pedagogy of boys and girls] In Ü-M. Papp (Ed.) Kas õpilase või poisid ja tüdrukud? Uurimus Eesti õpetajate ja haridustöötajate valmisolekust sootundlikuks õpetamiseks ja kasvatamiseks [Students or boys and girls? A study on the readiness of teachers and educational specialists in Estonia for gender sensitive education and teaching] (pp. 59–88). Tallinn.
- Liljander, P. (2012) Pierre Bourdieu. Koulutus, symbolinen väkivalta ja yhteiskunnallinen eriarvoisuus [Education, symbolic violence and societal differences in value positions]. In Kasvatussosiologian suunnannäyttäjiä [Developments in educational sociology]. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
- Lips, H.M. (1991). Women, men, and power. California: Mayfield Publishing Company.
- Paechter, C. (2007). Being boys, being girls: Learning masculinities and femininities. NY: Open University Press.
- Papp, Ü-M. (Ed.). (2013). Kas õpilase või poisid ja tüdrukud? Uurimus Eesti õpetajate ja haridustöötajate valmisolekust sootundlikuks õpetamiseks ja kasvatamiseks [Students or boys and girls? A study on the readiness of teachers and educational specialists in Estonia for gender sensitive education and teaching]. Tallinn.
- Plicher, J., & Whelehan, I. (2004). Fifty key concepts in gender studies. London: Sage Publication.
- Praxis report (2014). Gender awareness at school – why and for what purpose? Presentation by Praxis on Dec 17.
- Rajakaltio, H. (2011). Moninaisuus yhtenäisyydessä. Peruskoulu muutosten ristipaineissa [Diversity in coherence – comprehensive school in the cross-pressure of change]. Tampere: Acta Universitatis Tamperensis.
- Rehbein, B. (2006). Die Soziologie Pierre Bourdieus [The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu]. Konstanz: UVK Verlagsgesellschaft mbH
- Riddell, S. (1989). Pupils, resistance and gender codes: a study of classroom encounters. Gender and Education, 1 (2), 183–197.
- Saarinen, J., Ojala, H., & Palmu, T. (2014) Mikä ihmeen feministinen pedagogiikka? [What is feminist pedagogy?] In J. Saarinen, H. Ojala, T. Palmu (Eds.) Eroja ja vaarallisia suhteita. Keskusteluja feministisesta pedagogiikastä [On differences and dangerous relationships. Conversations about feminist pedagogy]. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylän yliopistopaino.
- Salminen, J. (2012). Koulun pirulliset dilemmat [The devilish dilemmas of the school]. Helsinki: Kustannusosakeyhtiö teos.
- Skelton, C., & Francis, B. (2001). Endnotes. Gender, school policies and practices. In B. Francis and C. Skelton (Eds.) Investigating gender: Contemporary perspectives in education. Buckingham: Open University Press.
- Soo, K., & Kutsar, D. (2012). Mehelikkuse tüpiseerimine noormeeste enesehinnangute, soorolliga rahulolu ja seksuaalkäitumise järgi [The typification of masculinity based on young men’s self-assessment, satistifaction with the gender role and sexual behaviour]. Ariadne Lõng, 1/2, 19–34.
- Tilbury, D. (2011). Education for Sustainable Development. An Expert Review of Processes and Learning. UNESCO.
- Wiens, K. (2006). The new gender gap: what went wrong? Journal of Education, 3, 11–27.
- World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Youdell, D. (2011). School trouble. Identity, power and politics in education. London & New York: Routledge.