<p>The teaching book is a very important device in schools and its potential impact can be considerable. This essay analyses how gender is established in one of the most common teaching books in upper secondary school,</p><p><em>Blueprint A. The study aims to find out if the teaching book is stereotypical concerning the issue of gender equality. The analysis is made with Halliday’s Functional Grammar Theory as theoretical approach and is compared to the guidelines of the Curriculum and the Educational Act. To fulfil the aim of this essay, three texts are analysed from a gender perspective. If the verbs are dynamic/stative, and if the subjects function as agents or not are the factors used to establish if there is a difference between how females and males are represented in the texts. The hypothesis is based on a previous study on the same teaching book but regarding another edition and course (Odén 2005). It is hypothesised that there are differences in how men and women are presented in the texts and that women are described as more stative while men are described in more dynamic terms. The conclusion of this essay is that females are established as more stative than males and therefore it can be argued that the teaching book does not satisfy the goals of the Curriculum or the Educational Act. </em></p>
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA/oai:DiVA.org:hig-5476 |
| Date | January 2009 |
| Creators | Lysén Frej, Ulrika |
| Publisher | University of Gävle, Ämnesavdelningen för svenska språket och engelska |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, text |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds