Culture and Gender Representation in Iranian School Textbooks

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Ali Salami ; Amir Ghajarieh
• 关键词：Compulsory heterosexuality ; Critical Discourse Analysis ; EFL textbooks ; Iran ; Gender ; Education
• 刊名：Sexuality & Culture
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：March 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：20
• 期：1
• 页码：69-84
• 全文大小：416 KB
• 参考文献：Alvarez, R. (2002). Confessions of an information worker: a critical analysis of information requirements discourse. Information and Organization, 12, 85–107.CrossRef
  Babaii, E., & Ansary, H. (2003). Subliminal sexism in current ESL/EFL textbooks. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6.1, 40–56.
  Baiqiang, T. (2008) Identifying and combating sexism in EFL textbooks—with a case study into China. Retrieved from http://​www.​eric.​ed.​gov/​ERICDocs/​data/​ericdocs2sql/​content_​storage_​01/​0000019b/​80/​3e/​4c/​94.​pdf .
  Baker, (2008). Sexed texts: Language, gender and sexuality. London: Equinox.
  Baxter, J. (2010). Discourse-analytic approaches to text and talk. In L. Litosseliti (Ed.), Research methods in linguistics (pp. 117–138). London: Continuum.
  Blumberg, R. L. (2008). The invisible obstacle to educational equality: Gender bias in textbooks. Sex Role, 38(3), 345–361.
  Bolich, G. (2007). Conversing on gender. Raleigh, NC: Gardners Books.
  Chandler, D. (2007). Semiotics: The basics (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
  Cheng, K., & Ghajarieh, A. (2009). Gendered language in the classroom. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 6.3, 35–51.
  Cheng, K., & Ghajarieh, A. (2011). Addressing students with disabilities in school textbooks. Disability & Society, 26(2), 239–242.CrossRef
  Cheng, K., & Ghajarieh, A. (2012). Education and religion in Iran: The inclusiveness of EFL (English as a Foreign Language) textbooks. International Journal of Educational Development, 32(2), 310–315.CrossRef
  Choppin, A. (2004). História dos livros e das edições didáticas: sobre o estado da arte [History of books and teaching editions]. Educação e Pesquisa, 30(3), 549–566.CrossRef
  Coates, J. (2003). Women, men and language: A sociolinguistic account of gender differences in language (3rd ed.). Edinburgh: Pearson Education.
  Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity—rethinking the concept. Gender and Society, 19(6), 829–859.CrossRef
  Cruz, J., & Lewis, J. (1994). Viewing, reading, listening: audiences and cultural reception. Boulder, CO: Westview.
  Currah, P. (2006). Gender pluralisms under the transgender umbrella. In P. Currah, R. M. Juang, & S. Minter (Eds.), Transgender rights (pp. 3–32). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  Da Silva, Tadeu. (1999). T. The poetics and politics of curriculum as representation. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 7(1), 7–33.CrossRef
  Equal Opportunities Commission. (1997). A baseline survey of equal opportunities on the basis of gender in Hong Kong: 1996–1997. Hong Kong: Equal Opportunities Commission.
  Esen, Y. (2007). Sexism in school textbooks prepared under education reform in turkey. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 5(2). Retrieved from http://​www.​jceps.​com/​ .
  Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. London: Polity Press.
  Fairclough, N. (1995a). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.
  Fairclough, N. (1995b). Media discourse. London: Edward Arnold.
  Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power (2nd ed.). London: Longman.
  Fairclough, N. (2003). Analyzing discourse and text: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge.
  Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Malaysia: Pearson Education Limited.CrossRef
  Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical discourse analysis. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction: A multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 258–284). London: Sage Publications.
  Flax, J. (1993). Mothers and daughters revisited. In J. Verhulst, K. Schreurs, & L. Woertman (Eds.), Daughtering and mothering: Female subjectivity reanalyzed (pp. 145–159). London: Routledge.
  Garcia, V., & McManimon, P. M. (2011). Gendered justice: intimate partner violence and the criminal justice system. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
  Hall, S. (1980) Encoding/decoding. In Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (Ed.), Culture, media, language: Working papers in cultural studies, 1972–79. (pp. 128–38). London: Hutchinson.
  Halleck, S. L. (1991). Psychiatry and the dilemmas of crime. A study of causes, punishment and treatment. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  Halliday, M. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
  Ise, M., n.d. Gender in Japanese EFL textbooks. Retrieved from www2.​hawaii.​edu/​~cmhiggin/​660 P1 F 06/Ise.doc.
  Johnson, W. S. (2006). A time to embrace: Same-gender relationships in religion, law, and politics. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans.
  Kobia, J. M. (2009). Femininity and masculinity in English primary school textbooks in Kenya. The International Journal of Language Society and Culture, 28, 57–71.
  Kress, G. (1996). Representational resources and the production of subjectivity. In C. R. Caldas-Coulthard & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Texts and practices (pp. 15–31). London: Routledge.
  Lee, F. K., & Collins, P. (2008). Hong Kong students’ attitudes towards sexist language. Western Australia: Curtin University of Technology.
  Locher, M. A., & Graham, S. L. (2010). Interpersonal pragmatics. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRef
  Mayer, M., & Wodak, R. (2009). Critical discourse analysis: history agenda theory, and methodology. In R. Wodak & M. Mayer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 1–34). SAGE: Thousand Oaks, CA.
  McIIvenny, P. (Ed.). (2002). Talking gender and sexuality. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  Moore, B. N., & Parker, R. (2008). Critical thinking. New York: McGraw-Hill Humanities.
  Moradian, A. (2009). Domestic violence against single and married women in Iranian society. Tolerancy International September. Retrieved from http://​www.​iranian.​com/​main/​blog/​azad/​domestic-violence-against-single-and-married-women-iranian-society Sept 2009.
  Nightingale, V. (1996). Studying audiences: The shock of the real. London: Routledge.
  Pauwels, A. (1998). Women changing language. London and New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
  Rich, A. (1980). Compulsory heterosexuality and lesbian existence. Signs, 5, 631–660.CrossRef
  Sadker, D., & Zittleman, K. (2009a). Gender bias: From Colonial America to today’s classroom. In J. A. Banks & C. A. Banks (Eds.), Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (7th ed., pp. 137–153). New York: Wiley Custom Services.
  Sadker, D., & Zittleman, K. R. (2009b). Still failing at fairness: How gender bias cheats girls and boys in School and what we can do about it (2nd ed.). New York: Scribner.
  Shahidian, H. (2002). Women in Iran: Emerging voices in the women's movement. New York: Greenwood Press.
  Sheldon, L. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT Journal, 42, 237–246.CrossRef
  Sunderland, J. (2000). New understandings of gender and language classroom research: Texts, teacher talk and student talk. Language Teaching Research, 4(2), 49–173.
  Sunderland, J. (2004). Gendered discourses. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRef
  Sunderland, J., & McGlashan, M. (2012). The linguistic, visual and multimodal representation of two-Mum and two-Dad families in children’s picture books. Language and Literature., 21.2, 189–210.CrossRef
  Talbot, M. (2003). Gender stereotypes: Reproduction and challenge. In J. Holmes & M. Meyerhoff (Eds.), The handbook of language and gender (pp. 468–489). Malden, MA: Blackwell.CrossRef
  Taxel, J. (1989). Children’s literature: A research proposal from the perspective of the sociology of school knowledge. In S. deCastell, A. Luke, & C. Luke (Eds.), Language, authority, and criticism: Readings in the school textbook (pp. 32–45). London: Falmer Press.
  Thomas, L., & Wareing, S. (2003). Language, society and power: An introduction. London: Routledge.
  van Dijk, T. A. (1991). Racism and the press. London: Rutledge.
  van Dijk, T. A. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  van Dijk, T. A. (1997). Political discourse and racism: Describing others in Western parliaments’. In S. Riggins (Ed.), The language and politics of exclusion: Others in discourse (pp. 31–65). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London: Sage.
  van Dijk, T. A. (2000) Critical discourse analysis. Discourses in Society website. Retrieved from http://​www.​discourses.​org/​OldArticles/​Critical%20​discourse%20​analysis.​pdf .
  Van Leeuwen, T. (2003). The representation of social actors in discourse. In C. R. Caldas-Coulthard & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Texts and practices: Readings in critical discourse analysis (pp. 32–70). London: Routledge.
  Van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and practice new tools for critical discourse analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
  VanDijk, T. A. (2008). Discourse and power: Contributions to critical discourse studies. Houndsmills: Palgrave MacMillan.
  Wilbur, G. (1992) Gender-fair curriculum. Research report prepared for Wellesley College Research on Women. Washington, DC: American Association University Women.
  Wodak, R. (1989). Language, power and ideology. Studies in political discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRef
  Wodak, R. (1997). Gender and discourse. London: Sage.
  Wodak, R. (2005). Discourse analysis (Foucault). In D. Herman, M. Jahn, & M. Ryan (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of narrative theory (pp. 112–114). London: Routledge.
  Wodak, R. (2006). Images in/and news in a globalized world. In I. Lassen, J. Strunck, & T. Vestergaard (Eds.), Mediating ideology in text and image. Ten critical studies (pp. 19–32). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
  Wodak, R. (2007). Language and ideology: language in ideology. Journal of Language and Politics, 6.1: 1–5 to in Kuala Lumpur. June 21st–26th, University of Malaya.
  Wodak, R. (2012). A Visit by professor Ruth Wodak in Kuala Lumpur. June 21st–26th, University of Malaya.
  Wodak, R., & Reisigl, M. (2001). Discourse and discrimination. Rhetorics of racism and anti-Semitism. London: Routledge.
  
• 作者单位：Ali Salami (1)
  Amir Ghajarieh (2)
  
  1. Faculty of Foreign Languages and Literatures, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
  2. Language and Linguistics Faculty, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  
• 刊物主题：Social Sciences, general; Interdisciplinary Studies; Personality and Social Psychology; Psychology, general; Regional and Cultural Studies;
• 出版者：Springer US
• ISSN：1936-4822

文摘

This study examines the representations of male and female social actors in selected Iranian EFL (English as a Foreign Language) textbooks. It is grounded in Critical Discourse Analysis and uses van Leeuwen’s Social Actor Network Model to analyze social actor representations in the gendered discourses of compulsory heterosexuality. Findings from the analysis show that the representations endorse the discourse of compulsory heterosexuality which is an institutionalized form of social practice in Iran. Three male and three female students were interviewed to find out what they think about these representations. Their responses with regard to whether they think textbooks should also include representations of other forms of sexuality were non-committal and vague. To them LGBT people are the “Other” practicing a form of sexuality that is not normal. Such exclusions could obscure the reality regarding the existence of such gender identities and represent the world in a particular manner. Keywords Compulsory heterosexuality Critical Discourse Analysis EFL textbooks Iran Gender Education