DISERTASI dan TESIS Program Pascasarjana UM, 2016

Ukuran Huruf:  Kecil  Sedang  Besar


Nicko Putra Witjatmoko




Witjatmoko, Nicko P. 2016. Gender Representation in Two EFL Textbooks Used in Grade VII of Junior High Schools. Master’s Thesis, English Department, Graduate Program, Universitas Negeri Malang. Advisors: (1) Prof. Dr. Nur Mukminatien, M.Pd., (2) Dr. Mirjam Anugerahwati, M.A


Keywords: gender representation, EFL textbooks, Indonesian 2006 curriculum, Indonesian 2013 curriculum

With the growing awareness of gender equality, it is of importance to see how this awareness in the realm of education. In education, a textbook is not only seen as a medium for both the teachers and the students in teaching and learning activity, but it is also seen as a medium that represent and shape genders of its users. Meanwhile, as Indonesia’s curriculum changed from the 2006 Curriculum to 2013 Curriculum, the textbooks used also changed. Thus, it is important to see how gender representation appears in the books used in 2006 Curriculum in comparison to those used in 2013 Curriculum. In finding the answer, the present study compares one book for each curriculum: English in Focus for Grade VII from the 2006 Curriculum (henceforth Book A) and When English Rings a Bell from the 2013 Curriculum (henceforth Book B). Then, the study will conclude which book presents more gender equal material than the other. 

This study employs content analysis method in seeking how two books represent gender. Adopting the instruments that have been used by previous researchers (Stockdale, 2006; Diktas, 2011, Wienanda, 2012), the present research seeks how gender is represented by the book by looking at the number of 1) texts focusing on particular gender, 2) active male and female, and non-active male and female characters in texts, 3) amount of talk of male and female characters in the texts, 4) talk initiator, 5) male and female characters’ presence in texts and illustrations, 6) the list of occupational activities done by female and male characters, 7) the list of routines done by female and male characters, and 8) the list of background used to portray female and male characters in the illustration used by the books.

The findings reveal that in term of number of dialogs done by a particular gender, Book A is more gender equal than Book B by having 17.34% for both male-only and female-only dialogs in the book while Book A is less equal than Book A by presenting 43.94% male-only dialog and presenting only 22.29% of female-only dialog. Furthermore, it is also found that number of active male and female characters in Book A are more equal in percentage (50.49% and 49.51% respectively) while those in book B are less equal by having 54.27% and 45.73% for male characters and female characters respectively. In terms of the amount of talk by male and female characters, Book A allows equal number of words spoken by its both male and female characters (49.92% and 50.08% correspondingly), making it more equal in term of amount of talk than Book B. However, in terms of talk initiator, Book B presents more equal numbers for its male and female characters (53.12% and 46.88%) compared to Book A (45.83% and 54.17%). Furthermore, percentage gap in both books in terms of male and female presence in texts and illustration shows that Book A is more equal by having less than 1% gap difference compared to Book B with more than 15% percentage difference. For the list of occupation, Book A gives more occupation choices to its male characters (17 kinds) than its female characters (10 kinds), making Book A less equal in term of occupation than Book B (12 kinds and 10 kinds for male and female characters respectively). For the activities done by both books’ male and female characters, Book B gives 22 choices of activities for its male characters while it gives only 19 kinds of activities for its female characters, making it less equal than Book B. Lastly, in terms of background showing male and female characters, Book A is more equal by having less than 15% percentage gap compared to Book B.

Based on the findings of the study, it can be concluded that Book A presents more materials that are equal in gender representation. However, when it comes to which one has less stereotyping occurring in the books, Book B should be praised for not sticking in the traditional view of gender by, for example, depicting women as working women or by depicting them as police officer.


As this current study only view gender representation from the quantitative data with a little addition from the qualitative data, the future researchers, who are interested in researching gender representation in textbook, are recommended look at the discourse hidden within the book, of which is something that this current research lacks.