Abstract
Statement of Problem
This study conducted a quantitative and qualitative content analysis of middle and high school textbooks to assess the amount, type, and extent of gender and ethnic inclusion and forms of bias, relative to Chicana or Mexican American females. Since the 1970s, feminists and ethnic groups found textbooks were dominated by male, Eurocentric hegemony, which marginalized females, especially those of color. In addition to the lack of inclusion, these groups were presented in biased images and messages. Negative messages in the formal curriculum, coupled with societal stereotypes impaired Chicana academic engagement and achievement.
Sources of Data
Data was collected and analyzed from two U.S. history and two world history social studies textbooks used in middle school and high school. Components in the textbooks used to collect and analyze data included photos and illustrations and text. Sub-components from the text included the main storyline or narrative in the text, biographies, and indexes. Recognized frameworks for the assessment of gender inclusion and bias, ethnic integration, and storyline analysis were used to analyze textbooks which derived from a northern California school district.
Conclusions Reached
The results indicated females were disproportionately underrepresented in ratios that ranged from 1 to 13 through 1 to 4 compared to males. The lack of inclusion of Chicanas was indicated by .004% representation in the combined textbooks. In addition, all forms of bias were applicable to the attention Chicanas did receive: invisibi1ity, stereotyping, imbalance and selectivity, unreality, fragmentation and isolation, linguistic bias, and cosmetic bias. Ethnic integration did not go beyond the additive approach nor did Chicana or Latina perspectives appear in the text. Awareness of racist and sexist curriculum shed light into the lack of motivation and disengagement among Chicana or Mexican American adolescent girls. The goal of social studies to instill values and participation in the democratic process was not supported by the exclusive and biased data found in the textbook samples.