Inclusive Textbooks

Your language teaching lesson, should you choose to accept it, is to critically examine the texts you use in your language classroom through the lens of Moore’s Taxonomy of Representational Heteronormativity.

“Part of our job as [language] teachers will always be to help our students find the language to describe the world around them” (Moore, 2020, p. 123)

Sometimes I come across academic articles that I want to share in detail, and this is one of them! Ashley Moore, a doctoral candidate at the University of British Columbia, created a taxonomy so that language teachers can examine our textbooks and figure out what kind of LGBTQ+ representation is present. Why does this matter? Well, the reality is that heterosexuality is represented as the default in all language textbooks. In a 2013 study, a review of 10 ELT textbooks found that seven made no reference to any non-heterosexual relationships or identities, and the three that did fell into the “good gays” trope (see below). While this is also true of a majority of the media that we consume (though that’s changing more and more!) heteronormativity (the assumption that the heterosexual experience is the human experience) is not healthy for our students. Once we have more inclusive resources we are not only better reflecting the real world that our students live in, but we’re sending the message to our LGBTQ+ students that their full selves are welcome in our classrooms.  

Moore’s taxonomy (which I’ve posted below with the permission of the author) looks at queer representation in language textbooks from the most to least damaging perspectives:

Basically, what he has done is given us the language to use to best describe what we find inside our textbooks in regard to inclusion of different sexualities. The way I see it, this taxonomy is a tool to pull out at department meetings when discussing old resources or new purchases, or to have on your wall to evaluate a film/reading/graphic novel that you’re about to use with your class. Most of us know to avoid anything blatantly homophobic, but how often are we pushing ourselves to go beyond that?

My challenge to you is to join me in examining your texts using Moore’s taxonomy. If you pull out your books, I’ll pull out mine and we can do it together! I’ll wait… and for those who already have your textbooks beside you, while we wait for the others, I encourage you to watch Moore’s fantastic video (21 minutes) where he explains his taxonomy in a very clear and detailed way!

Everybody’s here? Great! Let’s get started.

I’m going to be using the textbook series “Entre Nous”, which is for French learners. It has four volumes (for levels A1, A2, B1, B2), is suitable for teens and adults, and my editions say they are published in France by the Centre de Recherche et de Publications de Langues.

We’re going to run through the taxonomy from most damaging to students to least damaging:

“Entre Nous” - Example of heteronormative erasure

Explicit heterosexism: this is when heterosexuality is explicitly valorized in contrast to any other identities, which are presented as abnormal. Fortunately, I was unable to find any examples of this in my textbooks. However, Moore uses the example of an episode from Friends, a commonly used series for English-language learners, where Joey and Ross are mocked for taking naps together.

Heteronormative erasure: this is when heterosexuality is the assumed norm, which then sends the message to students that discussion of non-heterosexual identities is not appropriate in the classroom. I definitely found examples of this in the “Entre Nous” textbook family: in fact, this was (other than one example in the next category) the only category that I found. All photos of couples were heterosexual… and white (another big issue!).

“Entre Nous” - Example of heteronormative marginalization

Heteronormative marginalization: this is when non-heterosexual people are only included when talking about social justice issues (i.e., talking about HIV/AIDS or discrimination). This is well-intentioned, but actually marginalizes LGBTQ+ people further. This is the one example I found that didn’t fit into the above category.  

Heteronormative mainstreaming: this is when only the “good gays” (gay people that imitate Western heterosexual norms) are accessible. While having representation is important, Nelson (1999) notes that “Solidifying fluid sexualities into fixed sexual identities… [has] more to do with social control than with empowerment” (as cited in Moore, 2020, p. 122). While “Entre Nous” doesn’t have any examples of this, Moore points to another popular show used for teaching English, Modern Family, and the two “good gay” characters of Cam and Mitch.

Queer inclusion: this last category is when queer people are included in textbooks and are viewed not just through the lens of their sexuality, but are presented as complete people with intersectional identities. Additionally, those featured do not always fit into Western heterosexual norms. The textbooks I was looking through definitely did not do this, but Moore recommends a text made by Taylor Made English. Personally, I found a Guardian article about the “new American family” that I thought would make a good text to use with students that would fall in this category.

So, in conclusion, my textbooks don’t reflect the reality my students live in. Why is that? If your first guess is money, then you are completely correct. Textbook companies want to be able to sell their textbooks in as many markets as possible, and that means playing it safe (i.e., sticking to the hetero norm) for fear of alienating more conservative districts.  However, if we start asking questions of textbook representatives or directing our textbook budget towards more diverse resources, we can start sending the message that if they want our money, they need to be more inclusive. Moore also notes that most teachers will need to find “hacks” for our curriculum, which means supplementing what we have with resources we find elsewhere (check out the list below).

Also, more and more (or should I say “Moore and Moore”?... I’ll show myself out) I’ve been thinking about the author-text connection. For example, do I encourage my students to read Harry Potter in the target language? The texts themselves are not “explicit heterosexism” (though they would be “heteronormative mainstreaming”) but the author has said really damaging things about trans people. Should I instead redirect them to other great YA books that feature magical schools, but are more inclusive, like Naomi Novik’s fabulous Scholomance Trilogy or other sci-fi/fantasy trans-inclusive books? Should I also let them know about the amazing queer fandom that has grown alongside the books? Or should I just let them enjoy reading something in their L2 and make sure I’m peppering their language education with other LGBTQ+ inclusive resources? I’m sure my opinion on this will continue to evolve, but I’d love if you shared your own perspectives in the comments.

Lastly, when I reached out to Ashley Moore for permission to use his taxonomy in this post, he very generously invited any readers who want to learn more to reach out to him. You can also follow him on Twitter @AshleyRMoore.

 Some supplemental resources:

 ELL:

French:

  • Coucou French Classes’ “The Best French LGBTQ+ French movies” (not all films would be classroom appropriate)

  • French Today’s short text “Being LGBTQ+ in France” (this falls into heteronormative erasure, but is an interesting read, and frankly the only text I found that is written for language-learners)

  • I have a ton of links about using inclusive language in your French class here

Spanish:

 

What resources do you use in your classroom? Share below in the comments!