Gender Prejudice in School Curriculum: A Case of a Kenyan Primary English Textbook
##article.abstract##
This paper has identified curriculum materials as an area that requires focus and serious analysis as far as gender issues are concerned. It studied a primary class five English text course book from a gender lens. It employed a qualitative content analysis to study a case of curriculum material that should present a gender balance of not only masculinity and feminity but also femininity issues as affecting the Kenyan nation. It sought to answer the questions below: how many significant representations of girls and women are in the texts compared to boys and men? What visible roles are they designed to portray about gender orientations and is gender sensitive language used to balance the skewed societal perceptions or which aspects of the text have complied and conformed to the hegemonistic masculinity? In so doing, the aspects analyzed in this text were gender representation in a text as presented on the cover and title page, topic, subject matter and contents. How are both genders not only represented but also presented neutrally doing, caring family and institutional tasks, how are the employment of gender (in)sensitive language (neuter) used to describe both genders. The findings indicate an adherence to the status quo and evidence of gender biases and stereotypes as far as gender roles and representations are concerned. The study concluded that the case under study was a gender blind text and recommended that further case studies that could generalize their findings be executed across the curriculum, that such texts should be revised to be in tandem with the country’s 2011 gender policy document, that a censorship threshold be legislated.
References
A
nsary, H. & E. Babaii. (2003). The manifestation of subliminal sexism in current Iranian secondary school ELT textbooks. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6, 57-69.
Arnold-Gerrity, D. (1978). Sex Stereotyping of Women and Girls in Elementary Textbooks and its implication for future Workforce participation. Paper presented at the North Central Sociological Association , Cincinnati, May 1978 Washington D.C.
Butler, J. (2004). Undoing Gender. New York Routlrdge, 2004. Gottfried, S.S., & Kyle, W.C (1992). Text book Use and the Biology Education Desired State.Journal of Reseasearch in Science Teaching, (1) 35-49 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14682366.2012.669394.
Byrd, P. (2001). Textbooks: Evaluation for selection and analysis for implementation. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language. (3rd ed.) (pp. 415-424). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Cameron, D. (1992). Feminism and linguistic theory. (2nd ed.). London: Macmillan http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959353592023026.
Cohen, L. & L. Manion. (1992). Research method in education (3rd ed.): London: Routledge.
Crawford, J. (2002). The role of material in language classroom: Finding the teaching . In J. C. Richards & W. A.
Einser, E. (1985). The Educational Imagination (2nd ed.).New York: Routledge.
Gharbavi, A. & Mousavi, S. A. (2012). The application of functional linguistics in exposing gender bias in Iranian high school English textbooks. English language and Literature Studies, 2 (1), 85- 93.
Graci, J.P. (1989). Are foreign language textbooks sexist? Exploration of models of evaluation. Foreign Language Annals, 22, 77-86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1989.tb02771.x
Hall,D.R & A.Hewing.(eds) (2001). Innovative in English Language Teaching . London Routledge.
Hartman, P.L. & E.L. Judd. (1978). Sexism and TESOL materials. TESOL Quarterly, 12, 383-393. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3586137
Jackie F. K. and Collins P. (2010). Construction of gender: a comparison of Australian and Hong Kong English language textbooks. Journal of Gender Studies, 19(2), 2010, 121-137.
Kemp, J.E. (1977). Instructional design: A plan for unit and course development (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
Kenya Institute of Education (2014). Print and Electronic Media Catalogue, Nairobi: KIE.
Kimmel, E.A (1973). Children’s Reading and Attitude Change. (Doctoral Dissertation University of Illinois at Urbana Champaigne, 1973). Dissertations Abstracts International, 34/1, 514A. Gharbavi & Mousavi, 2012).
Lee A.S. and Gupta. A.F. (2009). Gender representation in English language textbooks used in Singapore primary schools. National University of Singapore. Language and Education, 4(1), 29-50
Lesikin, I. (2001). Determining social prominence: A methodology for uncovering gender bias in ESL textbooks. In D. R. Hall & A. Hewing (Eds), Innovation in English Language Teaching (275-282). London: Rutledge.
Malova, C. N. (2012). Portrayal of gender roles in Kenyan Secondary school textbooks: an ethnographic view with special reference to English. URL http://african-studies.uonbi.ac.ke/node/505
Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative Content Analysis. Theoretical Foundation, Basic Procedures and Software Solution, Austia: Klagenfurt.
Mcmillan, J.H &Wergin, J.F (2000).Understanding and Evaluating Educational Research. New Jersey: Merrill Prentice Hill.
Peterson, S. & Kroner. T. (1992). Gender biases in textbooks for introductory psychology and human development. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 16, 17-37. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1992.tb00237.x
Porreca, K. L. (1984). Sexism in current ESL Textbooks. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 704-707. http: //dx.doi.org/10.2307/3586584.
Republic of Kenya National Plan of Action to implement the National Gender Policy (2008 – 2012). Government Printer
Republic of Kenya, Ministry of Gender, Children and Social Development Gender Policy (2011). Government Printer.
www.sciedu.ca/elr English Linguistics Research 1(1), 2012 Published by Sciedu Press 44 ISSN 1927-6028 E-ISSN 1927
