Pedagogy, Culture & Society

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpcs20

Still in the shadow of Confucianism? Gender bias

in contemporary English textbooks in Vietnam

Mai Trang Vu & Thi Thanh Thuy Pham

To cite this article: Mai Trang Vu & Thi Thanh Thuy Pham (2023) Still in the shadow of
Confucianism? Gender bias in contemporary English textbooks in Vietnam, Pedagogy, Culture
& Society, 31:3, 477-497, DOI: 10.1080/14681366.2021.1924239

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2021.1924239

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group.

Published online: 08 Jun 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 4451

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 5 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rpcs20
PEDAGOGY, CULTURE & SOCIETY
2023, VOL. 31, NO. 3, 477–497
https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2021.1924239

Still in the shadow of Confucianism? Gender bias in

contemporary English textbooks in Vietnam
a
Mai Trang Vu and Thi Thanh Thuy Phamb
a
Department of Language Studies, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden; bFaculty of English Language Teacher
Education, ULIS, Vietnam National University, Vietnam

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Gender bias in teaching materials may influence students’ develop­ Gender bias; English
ment and contribute to social inequalities. This study investigates textbook analysis; cultural
possible gender bias in a newly published English textbook series in norms; Confucian values;
Vietnam
Vietnam. Holding gender as a social construct, the research uses a
multimodal critical approach to examine language and ideological
systems. The results show despite some effort for gender equity,
the making of textbooks in today’s Vietnam is still affected by
patriarchal Confucian values. Males inhabit bigger verbal space
and have more social properties. Females are portrayed as less
independent; their choices are more limited, and with less
resources. Textbook author interviews show the writing was influ­
enced by conscious and unconscious bias, but they agreed gender
equality is important, although male domination beliefs still seem
to be deeply ingrained in the society. The study raises questions on
challenging the status quo and creating a new cultural narrative for
women’s rights recognition and enactment.

Introduction
Textbooks are materials of authority – the ideas, values, and perspectives embedded in
textbooks are influential considering their potential large audience. Blumberg (2008, 345)
argues that gender bias in textbooks is an ‘important, near-universal, remarkably uniform,
and quite persistent but virtually invisible obstacle on the road to gender equality in
education – an obstacle camouflaged by taken-for-granted stereotypes about gender
roles’. Investigating what certain kinds of language, persons and actions are being
promoted or missing may reveal different discourses (ideas about the world) that factor
in social practices (e.g. actions, processes, and rules) (Ledin and Machin 2018).
This research examines gender representation in English textbooks in contemporary
Vietnam, trying to dismantle possible biases, subtle and sophisticated as they might be.
Adopting social-cultural theories which suggest that gender is socially constructed, the
study uses critical discourse analysis and investigates the ideology/discourse recognisable
through its manifestation in linguistic ‘traces’ (Sunderland 2004, 7). The study asks ques­
tions about our notions of gender, to examine how or when the feminine or masculine is
constructed as powerful, to explore genderedness (Jule 2018).

CONTACT Mai Trang Vu trang.vu@umu.se Department of Language Studies, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any med­
ium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
478 M. T. VU AND T. T. T. PHAM

The story of gender equality never gets old. Gender is revealed in discourse: femininity
(and masculinity) is socially constructed and continuously produced (Scharff 2013). Global
patterns have shown that women still experience gender-related violence, discrimination
in the workplace and public life, and more limited choice of partners and reproductive
rights (Lips 2014; Mills 2012). These issues are largely impacted by cultural forces including
societal norms, expectations, and restrictions (Lips 2014). In Vietnam, empowering
women and girls so that they can reach their full potential has been promoted.
However, with centuries of history and culture influenced by Confucianism – the ancient
Chinese system of beliefs that emphasises male domination – ensuring girls’ and women’s
rights remains a challenge for the country (UNFPA 2020).
Recent research conducted in various contexts such as Poland, Turkey, Sweden,
Uganda, China, and Japan (Pakuła, Pawelczyk, and Sunderland 2015; Li 2016; Carlson
and Kanci 2017; Namatende-Sakwa 2018; Lee 2019), reveals a hidden curriculum of
gender inequality in textbooks. This study provides empirical findings from contemporary
Vietnam – a context still under-researched. In Vietnam, there have been several English
textbook investigations but they do not focus on gender (e.g. Dang and Seals 2018;
Nguyen, Marlina, and Cao 2020). The current study also provides perspectives from
textbook authors, an angle not yet widely explored in prior research.
Using a critical multimodal analysis of both texts and their visual supports (Ledin and
Machin 2018), the research explores how gender is represented in textbooks. Is there one
group portrayed as the powerful one while the others are rendered invisible in the
background or even missing? Is the portrayal of the roles, attributes, and behaviour of
a group assigned with particular sets of characteristics? Examining these interwoven
aspects – stereotyping, invisibility and imbalance/selectivity, helps raise important ques­
tions of power, prejudice, and inequality (Sadker and Zittleman 2007).
The textbooks analysed are a newly published English textbook series for lower
secondary education (grades 6–9, students aged 11–15). The production of the new
textbooks is among the measures within the ongoing National Foreign Languages
Project (NFL Project), Ministry of Education and Training (MoET) (2008–2020, extended
2020–2025) to reform the country’s foreign languages education, mainly through curri­
culum revision; textbook development; teacher assessment, education and training; and
facilities procurement.

Vietnam’s English textbooks

Textbooks in Vietnam, as in some other countries, e.g. Turkey and Indonesia, serve as the
main instructional materials, mandated by the government. Therefore, until recently,
‘textbooks’ in public schools in Vietnam means a single and compulsory national textbook
series produced by the Ministry,1 and school teaching is centrally planned via provincial
Departments of Education and Training.
As part of the NFL Project, in 2012, a revised English curriculum for lower secondary
education with content guidelines for each grade of 6, 7, 8, and 9, was approved (Decision
01/QD-BGDDT, MoET). Gender equality is not explicitly mentioned in the curriculum;
however, in the content suggested for grade 9, under the theme ‘Visions of the Future’,
there is a topic called Changing roles in society. The topic is elaborated as ‘Talking about
 PEDAGOGY, CULTURE & SOCIETY 479

male and female roles in domestic life’, and ‘Negotiating male and female roles in future
domestic life’ (ibid., 30).
The textbooks for lower secondary education within the NFL Project were jointly
produced during 2012–2016 by the Vietnam Education Publishing House and Pearson,
written by a team of local English language professionals, male and female, including
professors, teacher educators, school teachers, and language specialists from different
parts of Vietnam, in collaboration with international reviewers and editors from Pearson.
One of the researchers of this current study is a member of the writing team.
The textbook writing was based on the curriculum guidelines. Each Unit’s topic and its
linguistic content were selected from the suggestions. The units were then written by
individual authors, and sent to Pearson editors for several rounds of review and revision.
The series was piloted during 2012 in 30 provinces in Vietnam, with 88 schools, 184
classes, and 9,099 students (Hoang 2018). Since then, the series has been used by millions
of students and teachers in public schools under the NFL Project in cities and provinces
throughout Vietnam.

Gender as a social construct

From birth onwards we are repeatedly forced to respond to gendered norms and to act
according to our gendered roles. These are ingrained in cultural, social, political and
psychic life: we are gendered in and through repeated performance – we perform gender
(Butler 1990). Gender is produced as performative effects of power: ‘[t]here is no gender
identity behind the expressions of gender; that identity is performatively constituted by
the very “expressions” that are said to be its results’ (Butler 1990, 25). Performances of
femininity (and masculinity) do not refer to intentional enactments, but are done con­
tinuously, and through that, produce femininity (Scharff 2013). Gender can be constructed,
produced, represented, and indexed (Sunderland 2004, 22, italics in original).
Concerning gender and power hierarchies, language and its intentions have been
widely selected by social scientists as an analytical approach. Examining language criti­
cally in light of power relations thus enables us to go deeper, past the surface of everyday
experience: tensions, contradictions or conflicts that otherwise may go unnoticed or seen
as unproblematic reveal how power relations function (Jule 2018).
Studies conducted around the world have provided examples of gender representa­
tion in textbooks. Generally, they reflect discourses of ideologies, stereotypes, bias, and
norms that still disadvantage women (e.g. Pakuła, Pawelczyk, and Sunderland 2015; Li
2016; Carlson and Kanci 2017; Namatende-Sakwa 2018; Lee 2019). In Poland, men are
represented in powerful positions while women are within the stereotypically feminine
domain of appearance (Pakuła, Pawelczyk, and Sunderland 2015). Similarly, in Uganda,
women are constructed as obsessed with physical appearance; they are emotional, and
dependant on men, who are the providers; these gender productions are rooted in
traditional patriarchal beliefs of an agricultural economy (Namatende-Sakwa 2018). In
contemporary Japan, where men are the breadwinners and women are expected to stay
at home, textbooks reflect this ideology: men occupy more social roles, while women’s
achievements are almost invisible (Lee 2019). Comparing textbook illustrations in China in
different periods, Li (2016) concluded that despite the government’s efforts at eliminating
gender disparities, Confucian values were still present in the materials: Women continue
480 M. T. VU AND T. T. T. PHAM

to be portrayed as inferior to men. In Turkey, with a culture of ‘enemies’ and ‘defence’ that
shapes masculinity around the concept of the ‘warrior-protector’, men are portrayed as
the protector, while women are the object to be protected; women’s foremost role is
being mothers even if they have some other social roles (Carlson and Kanci 2017). Similar
findings were found in Sweden – a context often known for gender equality: women are
absent as active subjects of the story; they can strive to realise their goals, but through the
work of men (Carlson and Kanci 2017).
Indeed, stereotyping, invisibility and imbalance/selectivity are among the biases that
possibly emerge in instructional materials (Sadker and Zittleman 2007). Stereotyping is
the association of certain, often rigid, roles, traits, and behaviours with a particular group,
and thus it may lead to an incorrect image of that group’s capabilities. Invisibility and
imbalance/selectivity occur when a group is underrepresented or even excluded, which
implies they do not have as much value and importance as other groups (Sadker and
Zittleman 2007).
In the present study, the intertwined concepts of stereotyping, invisibility and selec­
tivity/imbalance are discussed as themes to highlight different facets of gender depictions
in the books. Is there a dominance of a particular group (e.g. girls vs. boys, women vs.
men)? How are they presented? Is the portrayal of the roles, attributes, and behaviour of
a gender group assigned with particular sets of characteristics? To what extent might this
have been influenced by stereotyped norms and values?
The study approaches gender equality as the equal rights, responsibilities and oppor­
tunities of women and men, and girls and boys (United Nations n.d.). Gender inclusiveness
is thus a democratic participation of individuals and groups in the society, in recognition
of each particular group’s distinctive features, strengths, and capabilities, regardless of
their sex. With this inclusive viewpoint, during the analysis, a non-gender specific per­
spective to feminist textual analysis (Mills 2012, 93) was adopted: the texts (and their
visual supports) were scrutinised without a prior assumption that they simply portray
women in a sexist, oppressive manner.

Vietnam: Confucianism and gender discourses

The distinctiveness of Vietnamese culture (in relation to Chinese culture) has been
discussed by Vietnamese scholars (e.g. Mai 2014) reflecting attempts to reclaim
a Vietnamese historical identity. Indeed, Vietnam was under China’s control for over
one thousand years (111 BCE – 938 CE), and this has undoubtedly had lasting impacts,
especially on people’s ways of thinking. Confucianism remains an ideology influential on
social hierarchy and order, including family relationships.
Confucian countries (e.g. China, Korea, Vietnam, Japan, Singapore) have lower gender
equality (Grosse 2015). Vietnamese Confucian ideals of ‘men superior, women inferior’
hold that being a male is valued more than being a female. Men are the backbone at
home and in society, and are associated with noble qualities and virtues such as ‘nhân’, ‘lễ’,
‘nghĩa’, ‘trí’, ‘tín’ (kindness, decorum, uprightness, wisdom, and trustworthiness).
Meanwhile, women are seen from a functional perspective: they should have ‘công’,
‘dung’, ‘ngôn’, ‘hạnh’, which means they need to skilfully take care of housework, maintain
a tasteful look, have manners, and practise loyalty. Men are perceived as being more
intellectually and physically capable, while women’s life accomplishments are judged by
 PEDAGOGY, CULTURE & SOCIETY 481

their marriage. Men occupy public space while women’s ‘sphere’ remains the home. Even
at home, the woman seldom has her voice heard: she is expected to obey her father, her
husband, and then her son. Having a son is perceived to be better, as the son has the
mission of family linage – passing down the family name, known as the logic of ‘patri­
lineality’ (Gupta et al. 2003). The son will be the one who preserves the family heritage and
takes care of the parents, while the daughter will be married away (to serve her in-laws),
so sons often receive more investment (e.g. in education). In this sense, girl babies are
born, but they somehow do not exist, as seen in this saying, ‘You have one child if it is
a son, but you do not have any child even if you have ten daughters’ (Nhất nam viết hữu,
thập nữ viết vô).
During the 1960s until late 1980s, state-socialist ideologies influenced the national
political agenda, this including advocating equal gender participation. This ideal has
indeed helped increase women’s presence in economic and political domains. Vietnam
is currently among the top 10 gender-equal countries in the Asia-Pacific region with
regard to health, education, economic participation and political empowerment oppor­
tunities (World Economic Forum 2018). However, the present picture is still influenced by
a narrative that depicts women as devotedly serving, and even sacrificing for, others.
Promoting an ideal of the Vietnamese women who skilfully shoulder all responsibilities
and excel in both public and domestic spaces, may at the same time mean existing norms
and stereotypes against women are reproduced and reinforced.
According to UN Women, gender equality is yet to be achieved in Vietnam: women’s
lower income, violence against women, domestic work burdens, and workplace discrimi­
nation against women remain (Hanoitimes 2020). The latest State of the World Population
Report 2020 (UNFPA 2020) states that in Vietnam 40,800 girls could have been born
every year, according to natural sex ratios at birth, but were not, because of biased pre-
natal sex selection. Vietnam is currently among the countries with the highest rate of sex
ratio imbalance at birth (in 2019, the rate was 111.5 boys per 100 girls), the main cause of
which is ‘son preference’, rooted in Confucian values (VnExpress 2020). Confucianism is
still a predominant ideology that disadvantages women in terms of gender attitudes
(Grosse 2015), sex ratios, literacy rates, school enrolment rates, and years of schooling (Vu
and Yamada 2020).

Materials and methods

Gender content in textbooks has been studied following a wide range of methods –
content analysis, narrative method, visual study, critical linguistic analysis, frequency
counts, and corpus-based study (e.g. Pakuła, Pawelczyk, and Sunderland 2015; Li 2016;
Namatende-Sakwa 2018; Lee 2019). Besides its contribution exploring the topic in con­
temporary Vietnam as a rather under-researched setting, regarding methodology, the
current study provides findings using a systematic multimodal critical qualitative analysis,
combined with quantitative analyses. Also, interviews with the textbook authors offered
insights into the writing process, a dimension remaining largely underexplored.
To address the research questions (examining gender representation from a power
dynamic perspective, by exploring possible bias regarding the three interwoven aspects –
stereotyping, invisibility and imbalance/selectivity), the study adopts a critical perspec­
tive. Critical qualitative research seeks discursive understandings about social structures,
482 M. T. VU AND T. T. T. PHAM

power relationships, and challenges existing conditions with questions of positionality,

representation, and the production of situated knowledge (Bhavnani, Chua, and Collins
2014). A multimodality view of text was chosen: Both text and images were considered as
forms of communication that carry social meanings, and by looking closely at specific
instances and asking what exactly is being communicated, and how it is communicated,
the values and ideas being either foregrounded or backgrounded can be revealed (Ledin
and Machin 2018, 10, italics in original).
The data include four English textbooks (Student Book) of four levels of grades 6, 7, 8,
and 9 (Hoang et al. 2017), and an interview with three textbook authors. Each textbook
consists of 12 units and four review lessons. A unit is structured into seven sections:
Getting Started, A Closer Look 1, A Closer Look 2, Communication, Skills 1 (Reading and
Speaking), Skills 2 (Listening and Writing), and Looking Back and Project.
Getting Started was purposefully selected as unit of analysis, since it is designed to have
higher impacts on teaching and learning compared to other sections. Getting Started
occupies the largest space and content in each Unit, serving as the cover story that sets
the ground for both the theme and language teaching points for the whole Unit. The
section is presented as a conversation (of approximately 120–250 words, depending on
levels) and its subsequent tasks. The conversation text alone is attractively designed as
spreading over one or two pages with large graphic illustrations. Teachers are encouraged
to use the illustration as an effective tool (e.g. to facilitate comprehension, generate ideas,
support learning strategies, and increase motivation) (Teacher Book).
Altogether, the 48 Getting Started conversations and their accompanying illustrations
from the four books create a multimodal pool of data of 48 units of analysis. All 48 units
were analysed separately by each researcher, following a protocol comprising aspects of
conversation analysis (e.g. Coates 2004): a) amount of contribution, b) the topics dis­
cussed, c) portrayal of roles (females and males), and d) speech acts/transactivity (e.g. as
an information-provider or an information seeker/receiver). Findings from the textual
analyses were corroborated with the accompanying illustrations. The results were then
gathered and discussed by both researchers.
The study draws largely on qualitative analysis, while quantitative information was
used as a supplementary source for interpretation, and was discussed in connection with
qualitative data. Character contribution in each conversation was triangulated from
different sources: appearance of male and female characters, their participation in the
conversation (same-sex or mixed), and turn-taking. Emerging patterns were accordingly
interpreted into themes, discussed within the broader gender-related social cultural
discourse of Vietnam. Each gender’s contribution (or lack thereof) in certain topics, the
way they talk, and the depiction of their roles and characteristics reveal not only their
participation and identities in verbal discussions, but also their participation, identities,
and voices in the society in general.
The study chose not to focus on intersectionality aspects, including race (Vietnamese
characters vs. foreigner characters), and age – and thus status (children characters vs.
adult characters), nor did it look specifically into the interaction between same-sex
speakers.
To complement the textbook analysis, a group interview was conducted with three
authors of the series. The interview was an informal conversation where the authors were
informed about the research and their consent was sought. Two of them were female and
 PEDAGOGY, CULTURE & SOCIETY 483

one male. All of them had considerable experience as language experts, researchers, and/
or educational specialists, and had been working extensively with the writing and
production of textbooks. In the interview, the authors were asked about how they had
considered gender issues in writing the textbooks, how they thought gender equality
should be defined, and how possible it might be to bring gender equality into the
textbooks and the classroom.

Ethical considerations
As one of the researchers is also one of the textbook co-authors, extra reflexivity was
considered. The researcher’s familiarity with the series writing processes facilitated the
sense-making of the data, including data from the author interview because they were
relatable to the researcher. Meanwhile, factors that may lead to conflicts of interest were
identified in order to be mitigated: the relationship between the researcher and her
subject of inquiry (the researcher investigating and/or critiquing her own co-products),
between the researcher’s different professional roles (researcher vs. textbook writer), and
between the researcher as a member of the writing team and the team itself.
Throughout the study, the researcher and her co-researcher, who is not involved in the
textbook writing, ensured that the data were dealt with in fairness and with research
ethics. All the contents from the textbooks, including the Units written by the researcher
herself, were treated purely as research data. The data were analysed systematically
following the protocol, and they were examined according to the research aims, ques­
tions, and theoretical framework, independent from factors that may lead to possible
conflicts of interest earlier identified.

Results and discussion

Space taking: who is present? Who does the talking?
The 48 Getting Started conversations revolve around 23 children (10 girls and 13 boys),
and 13 adults (9 women and 4 men) (Table 1), making 19 female and 17 male characters.
Nevertheless, how much verbal space is taken up by each gender may not be reflected in
these figures, because it depends on the frequency of their appearance in the
conversations.
In terms of characters’ presence in the talking, of the 48 conversations, 29 (60.4%) are
mixed (both genders), 15 (31.3%) are same-sex, male, and 4 (8.3%) are same-sex, female
(Table 2). In two books (English 6 and English 8), there is no female same-sex conversation.
That 60.4% of the conversations involves both genders seems to be a positive indicator of
gender equality. However, of the remaining 39.6%, same-sex conversations between
females happen less than those between males. This means the overall presence of
females (68.7%) in all conversations is less than that of males (91.7%). This finding is
supported by a count of appearance of child characters (protagonists), with boys sig­
nificantly surpassing girls (72 vs. 40, Table 3).
Not only are males more prominently present, they also dominate the conversations, as
shown from the number of turns and turn lengths (Table 4). Males’ turns outnumber
484 M. T. VU AND T. T. T. PHAM

Table 1. Characters presented (in order of appearance).

Girls Boys Adult Females Adult Males
Vy Phong Phong’s mother Dr. Alex
Mi Duy 3 female show hosts Dr. Nelson
Mai Nick Mai’s mother Nguyen’s father
Chau Phuc 2 female teachers 1 male teacher
Girl in Hoi An Duong 1 female museum- guide
Elena Khang Nick’s mother
Oanh Hung
Veronica Tom
Nhi Nam
Amelie Phuong
Nguyen
Peter
Paul
10 13 9 4

Table 2. Gender participation in conversations.

Same-sex (female) Same-sex (male) Mixed
English 6 0 3 9
English 7 2 3 7
English 8 0 6 6
English 9 2 3 7
Total 4 (8.3%) 15 (31.3%) 29 (60.4%)

Table 3. Children characters’ (protagonists’) appearance.

Girls Boys
English 6 10 20
English 7 12 14
English 8 6 22
English 9 12 16
Total 40 (35.7%) 72 (64.3%)

Table 4. Turn-taking and turn-lengths (words).

Females’ turns Males’ turns Females’ turn lengths Males’ turn lengths
English 6 54 (30.2%) 125 (69.8%) 555 (32.8%) 1,137 (67.2%)
English 7 84 (52.8%) 75 (47.2%) 1,043 (55.4%) 839 (44.6%)
English 8 33 (21.3%) 122 (78.7%) 414 (19.9%) 1,662 (80.1%)
English 9 69 (40.6%) 101 (59.4%) 1,014 (39.8%) 1,534 (60.2%)
Total 240 (36.2%) 423 (63.8%) 3,026 (36.9%) 5,172 (63.1%)

females’ turns almost two to one (423 turns – or 63.8%, versus 240 turns – or 36.2%).
Regarding turn lengths, males spoke 5,172 words (63.1%), and females 3,026 words (36.9%).

Power hierarchies: Who can talk about what? And how do things get said?
The representation of males and females was approached quantitatively above. This
section provides an in-depth analysis of their portrayals and participation from
a qualitative perspective. Overall, stereotyping, invisibility, and selectivity/imbalance
bias could be detected in the textbooks.
 PEDAGOGY, CULTURE & SOCIETY 485

The upper-room sitting mat?

As mentioned earlier, a slightly larger share of the conversations (60.4%) involves both
genders. This reflects a general attempt to level the playing field. However, an overall
exploration suggests that boys/men still predominate in most areas. As presented earlier,
males take much bigger talk space than females, in terms of participation, turn-taking,
and turn-length. This means they talk about any topics under the sun. The topics are also
deemed more important, problematic, and more socially influential. In particular, the 15
conversations in which only boys/men are present (same-sex conversations) cover
science-technology, space, and the future (English 6 – Unit 10, coded as 6–10; English
6 – Unit 12, coded as 6–12; 9–10), travelling (8–2; 8–5; 8–8; 9–2), leisure time (6–7; 7–4; 8–
10), keeping fit (7–2), the past (8–6; 9–4), and social issues such as economy, education,
overpopulation and natural disasters (7–12; 8–9). In comparison, the 4 conversations that
feature female characters only (8.3%) are about the past (7–6), travelling (9–5), how one
goes to school (7–7), and choosing school subjects (and future career paths) (9–12).
Overall, boys/men dominate both the space and the content of the conversations,
while girls’/women’s involvement is limited.
The findings can be related to the Confucianism-influenced belief that women are
intellectually inferior to men – they do not have the capability required to discuss
important issues, and thus should be ‘sitting on the lower-room sitting mat’. Men should
be sitting on ‘the upper-room sitting mat’ – they are eligible to talk about things that
women cannot.

Occupational roles: Territories fenced?

There are 13 adult characters in the four textbooks, and often they are not the protago­
nists. However, examining their occupational roles reveals their participation in social
realms, and this may implicitly impact how learners see their own possibilities in the
future. Of the nine women, three are depicted as mothers; the remaining six work as a TV/
radio talk show host (3), a school teacher (2), and a museum guide (1). The numbers for
occupational roles are quite small; however, scrutinising them still offers some gender
insights. The four men are introduced as Dr. (2) (in natural sciences and technology) and
a school teacher (1), and a father (1). The three school teachers are seen in social sciences
lessons (festivals, customs and traditions, and English), and two of them are female. The
museum guide was seen at the Museum of Ethnology. As such, women are still depicted
mostly in stereotyped ‘feminine’ professions (school teacher in social sciences, guide). In
contrast, although men have started to ‘break the barrier’ to ‘women’ occupational spaces
(as seen with the school teacher who teaches English), regarding STEM – science,
technology, engineering, mathematics, men still dominate: both of the jobs in technology
and natural sciences belong to men. Men also enjoy a higher professional status: there are
two mentions of the title ‘Doctor’, and in both, the title is possessed by men. The zero
presence of females in these particular displays might reinforce the existing mindset that
STEM is men’s territory, while women’s space is within ‘soft’ disciplines. More importantly,
that the textbooks fail to include women regarding further education possibilities and
qualifications (with the highest degree possible of a PhD) reflects the (still) common belief
in the Vietnamese society that women cannot, and should not, pursue higher education,
especially post-graduate education. Li (2016) also finds that in textbooks in China, men are
486 M. T. VU AND T. T. T. PHAM

more often seen holding powerful and prestigious occupations than women, which is
related to Confucian values.

Domestic roles: Where is the father?

In the 48 Getting Started conversations, the mother appears four times (6–1; 7–5; 7–6; 9–
7), while the father only once (9–4). All the mothers are in the home setting: three in the
kitchen (6–1; 7–5; 9–7), and one in the living room (7–6). They all play the role of the main
caretaker. In 6–1, the illustration shows Phong’s mother in the kitchen with a kettle on the
stove (Figure 1). She is standing and receiving Phong’s friends, while Phong himself is
sitting at the table eating breakfast.
As such, when parents are introduced, in most cases it is the mother and the mother is
depicted as the main caretaker. There is little information that may suggest that the
mother can also be imagined in a different light (for example, their professional lives, their
own hobbies and interests, etc.).
In contrast, the father is given a brief appearance – in only one conversation (9–4).
During the time when all the housekeeping and childcare happen, the father is comple­
tely absent. In another story (9–11), although the information about her family situation is
not clear, Mai mentions this absence, ‘I don’t see much of my dad, but I love every
moment I spend with him’. The father’s child caring was mentioned only in passing,
and only in three conversations – the characters say they receive advice from their parents
(9–3), and from their father (9–5; 9–12). In the only conversation featuring the father (9–4),
he is not seen in a home setting doing housework; rather, he is ‘preserving the past’ by
giving his son (Nguyen) a kite, passing on family traditions and heritage to him. Also, his
concerns (preserving heritage) seem to have a more noble meaning; they do not revolve
around cooking, shopping, or packing – things typically reserved only for women.
When it comes to children doing housework, the picture, however, seems to be
brighter, with two conversations including boys shopping for groceries, and cooking
(6–11; 9–7). In 6–11, Nick runs into Mi at a supermarket, illustrated by Nick holding
a shopping bag full of stuff – a sight still rarely seen among men and boys in Vietnam
(Figure 2).
Nevertheless, in both 6–11 and 7–7, boys are introduced together with girls. In other
kitchen scenes in the books (6–1; 7–5), boys do almost no chores – their mothers do that
for them.
Overall, considering all the household scenes, females are always associated with
domestic roles, while males, especially the fathers, are almost absent. This reflects the
stereotype believing men’s space is in the society, and that of women is in the kitchen,
taking care of the family: Reproductive responsibilities and care- and house-work are seen
as obvious duties of women, which resonates with other research (Carlson and Kanci
2017; Lee 2019).

Who is the expert/ambassador?

The transactivity analysis suggests that males are portrayed more often as an expert/
ambassador – one who provides information about a country, a culture, a city/place of
interest, and a subject area (most notably in 6–5; 6–6; 6–9; 6–11; 6–12; 7–3; 7–5; 7–6; 7–10;
8–2; 8–5; 8–6; 8–11; 9–2; 9–4; 9–5; 9–7). The ’ambassadors’ show their knowledge of the
topic by answering questions, explaining, informing, or educating others.
Figure 1. Illustration Getting Started 6–1 (English 6, Unit 1).
PEDAGOGY, CULTURE & SOCIETY
487
488 M. T. VU AND T. T. T. PHAM

Figure 2. Illustration Getting Started 6–11 (English 6, Unit 11).

Meanwhile, females have fewer opportunities for this representative role. In 7–3
(Community service), one girl and one boy are invited to a talk show to tell about their
volunteer work, and the presence of both genders in this celebration, is important since it
reflects their voice, involvement, and impact on a larger social scale. Apart from that,
females act as the expert/ambassador in five stories (6–5; 7–6; 7–10; 9–5; 9–7), being the
information-providers. In two of these stories it is girls who are dominant in STEM topics
(6–5: geography; 7–10: energy).
Males, by contrast, are depicted as the source of expert knowledge and information in
11 (of 17) stories. For example, in 6–6, Phong is on an international talk show telling about
Vietnamese New Year’s traditions; in 8–2, 8–5, and 8–6 Nguyen and Duong explain about
Vietnamese legends, traditions, crafts, and festivals. Even though females participate in
discussions on science and technology, the area is dominated by males. Of the 16
characters in the 6 conversations on technology (6–10; 6–12; 7–11; 8–11; 8–12; 9–10),
12 characters are males. Girls seem to act as equal interlocutors in only two conversations
(7–11; 8–12). In their research, Pakuła, Pawelczyk, and Sunderland (2015) also found that
while both men and women are depicted as expert in some areas, overall, women still
occupy a symbolically feminine sphere (e.g. shopping, magazines, fashion).
Males are also the ambassador even of a generation (9–4). The earlier analysis of
Nguyen’s and his father’s conversation (9–4) shows that men are excluded from doing
housework, but it also reveals their special status representing generations, and family
continuation.
 PEDAGOGY, CULTURE & SOCIETY 489

Father: This is a present for you, son.

Nguyen: A kite! How cool! Thank you, dad.
Father: I made it for you, just like your grandfather used to make one for me.
Nguyen Is it a family tradition?
Father: Yes, for generations.
(English 9 , Unit 4)
Even if it is not clear from the context if Nguyen’s father is the only child of his
grandfather, or Nguyen is his father’s only child, it is obvious that only men are in focus.
Nguyen’s family tradition of making kites down generations seems to be reserved for men
only (Nguyen’s grandfather, Nguyen’s father, Nguyen), while the women of the family are
completely invisible. The ambassadors of the past and of the future – who have the noble
mission to keep the legacy alive, are men. Nguyen and his father’s story proves the logic of
‘patrilineality’ – men have the noble mission of passing down the family name, while
women are excluded from the picture.

Who has the savoir-vivre?

A recurrent image of the boy characters constructed in the books is of a (world) traveller.
Boys are present in 13/15 conversations that involve travelling, 9 of which are between
boys only, or mixed but with boys as the protagonists. Meanwhile, girls are underrepre­
sented on these fronts. Boys are depicted as curious, keen travellers who have the chance
to go to different places in Vietnam (6–4; 7–1; 8–2; 8–5; 8–7; 9–1). They also visit countries
around the world, from Brazil, France, to Singapore, Japan, and Australia, just to name
a few (6–9; 7–12; 8–5; 8–8; 9–2; 9–8; 9–10). If there is someone cherishing the dream of
travelling, it is a boy (6–5; 7–1; 9–10). Girls, conversely, appear in only four as doing, or
have been doing, some travelling (7–6; 8–7; 9–1; 9–5). It is also remarkable that girls’
travelling is much less far-reaching: they only travel within Vietnam: two cities (7–6; 9–1;
9–5), and a village (8–7; 9–1).
Not only are boys projected in the books as travellers who go far, they are also those
who enjoy a rich life full of different activities. Boys’ interests and leisure pursuits spread
over a wide range of options (besides travelling): television programmes (6–7), sports and
games (6–8; 7–12; 9–3), painting (6–10), robots (6–12), nature (6–10; 9–8), art galleries and
concerts (7–4), dogs (6–3; 8–1), climbing mountains (7–1), museums (8–3; 9–10), science
clubs (8–11), learning new languages and cultures (8–1; 8–8; 9–1), cinema and films (7–8;
8–10; 8–12), and space and collecting rocks as hobbies (9–10).
By contrast, girls’ pastime are mentioned with less frequency and also in a more limited
range of choices (besides travelling): sports and motion (6–8; 7–7), cinema and films (7–8;
8–10; 8–12), museums (9–5), craftwork (8–1; 9–1), collecting dolls and glass bottles (7–1),
and science clubs (8–11). It is striking that girls are absent from many settings of pastime,
leisure and entertainment. Instead, they are projected as more hardworking – (e.g. in 6.2,
girls work on school projects during the evening; in 9.3, Mai stays up late studying for
exams).
In addition, the portrayal of girls’ and boys’ interests and hobbies seems to noticeably
reflect stereotypes. Although girls appear in several scenes involving sports and motion
490 M. T. VU AND T. T. T. PHAM

(6–8; 7–7; 9–3), boys are depicted as sport lovers. Boys do judo, karate, football, table
tennis, badminton, cycling, swimming, while girls are only mentioned as doing cycling
and badminton. In 6–8, even if Mai (girl) likes going to the gym, she admires Duy (boy) for
being fit, and she actually tells him ‘I’m not good at many sports’. This stereotyped
association between males and sports in textbooks has also been noted in earlier
research, for example, in Pakuła, Pawelczyk, and Sunderland (2015).
More ‘manly’ interests such as mountain climbing, space, robots all belong to boys,
while more ‘girly’ ones such as crafts and dolls belong to girls. In 7–1 (My hobbies)
especially, some quite strong remarks about gender norms can be found.

Nick [talking to Elena who collects dolls and Mi who collects glass bottles]: I don’t know why
girls collect things. It’s a piece of cake.

Mi: Do you have a difficult hobby, Nick?

Nick: Yes, I enjoy mountain climbing.
(English 7, Unit 1)
What Nick says, though in a joking tone, shows stereotyped thoughts about what
counts as ‘real’ hobbies (e.g. his own hobby of mountain climbing). What girls do
(collecting) is easy ‘(piece of cake’), which boys do not do. His comments reveal gender
expectations and restrictions for both girls and boys.

Who dares to dream?

The books give opportunities for both girls and boys to imagine and plan their futures.
Four (of eight) Getting Started conversations in Visions of the future theme happen
between both genders (7–11, 8–11, 8–12, 9–11). Nonetheless, boys still have more voice
in this respect. Of the remaining four conversations, which are same-sex, three are
between boys (6–10; 6–12; 9–10), and only one between girls (9–12). Boys are also
more assertive in expressing ambitions, dreams, and aspirations. They specify what they
would like to do in the future (6–5, 6–10, 7–1, 9–10). In 6–5, Phuc says, ‘I want to visit Ayres
Rock one day’, and in 7–1, Nick claims, ‘In the future, I’ll climb mountains in other
countries too’.
The girls’ only conversation about the future, (9–12), however, is quite notable.
Veronica and Nhi talk about their future school subjects. Not only are they knowledgeable
about the topic (explaining how different school systems work), they also seem to be
confident about their choices over their schooling, higher education, and future career
paths. Moreover, STEM is explicitly mentioned as providing opportunities for girls.
Nevertheless, overall, girls show less independence, and have fewer resources for
being independent than boys. In the books, boys not only dream high, but they also
assert ways to actually realise their dreams. Even something as far away as outer space
seems not too distant (e.g. in 9–10). In 8–8, Phong attends a summer camp in Singapore;
and in 9–2, Duong visits Sydney and asks about the universities there. Meanwhile, girls do
not have these resources – they are simply absent from these conversations. In other
words, agency is taken away from girls (Carlson and Kanci 2017).
 PEDAGOGY, CULTURE & SOCIETY 491

Roles changing?
As mentioned earlier, the textbook writing followed the curriculum guidelines, and the
Getting Started in Unit 11, English 9, the very last book of the series, deals with the topic of
changing roles in society. The story is set as a talk show (Beyond 2030 forum) with three
students (Phong, Nguyen – boys, and Mai – girl) being invited to share their visions of the
future. The first half of the conversation is about roles in society in general, and towards
the second half of the conversation, the discussion on gender roles begins:
...
Interviewer: Fascinating. How else do you see the future, Nguyen?
Nguyen: Well, I think the role of fathers will drastically change.
Interviewer: Oh yes? In what way?
Nguyen: The modern father will not necessarily be the breadwinner of the family. He may
be externally employed or he may stay at home to take care of his children.
Interviewer: And do the housework?
Nguyen: Yes. It’s work, paid or not, isn’t it?
Mai: Absolutely. The benefit will be that children will see their fathers more often and have
a closer relationship with them. I don’t see much of my dad, but I love every moment
I spend with him.
(English 9, Unit 11)
There are many good things about this first, and only, conversation, where gender
roles are discussed explicitly. Those speaking up (Nguyen, Mai) are students/teenagers
(rather than parents/adults), who, to the learners of the textbooks, may become role-
models. The discussion (father’s changing roles) is initiated by a boy (Nguyen), and then
contributed to by both genders (Nguyen and Mai). Expressing their views about how
fathers’ roles will change, or should be changed in the future, also means the speakers
highlight at the same time the social norms towards men/fathers that exist in the present
(men are expected to be the breadwinner and not to stay at home taking care of children
and doing housework). When Nguyen says, ‘Well, I think the role of fathers will drastically
change’, and that ‘The modern father will . . . ’, he is also implying the current image
expected of fathers is far from the future visions that they are talking about; but that
image is not ‘modern’, and needs to be changed.
While the conversation tackles important issues of gender roles and succeeds in
encouraging breaking gender stereotypes, it seems, however, to have failed to depict
the struggles that mothers are having. The conversation focuses on father’s roles and
fights for father’s rights, which is needed. However, this ultimate concentration on the
father’s rights protection can also mean the mother’s contributions and rights are down­
played. The absence of the mother from the discussion may also send a message that
their roles are unimportant. Nguyen’s statement, ‘The modern father will not necessarily
be the breadwinner of the family’ is supposedly meant to lessen the financial responsi­
bility burden on men, but it, paradoxically, implies at present, women contribute little to
the family’s economy – a fact which is questionable. More importantly, the implication
that women are, and are expected to be, dependent financially, may also mean they
492 M. T. VU AND T. T. T. PHAM

should have less authority in the family. Also, that the father’s contributions to domestic
duties such as childcare and housework (in the future – which has not even happened yet)
should be recognised and celebrated is foregrounded, whereas the fact that it is the
mother who is doing all the duties (now, in the present) is not mentioned. This in fact may
raise a question about how women’s contributions are undervalued, and even imply
a double standard: women’s doing housework is taken for granted, while if the work is
done by men, it is advocated as paid work. Failing to focus on the struggles that women
are facing now, and failing to acknowledge women’s roles, might have adverse impacts on
women’s liberation and empowerment.

Textbook authors’ insights

During the writing process, gender was not a focus. Author 2 seldom paid attention to this
issue at first, and it ‘came as natural’ when designing an exercise with 5 sentences, she
would use the subject he four times, and she only once. Author 3, meanwhile, said she was
somewhat aware of how he and she was decided, but he or she was ‘a habit, a natural act’.
For example, the author chose she to go with cook, but he to go with play sports.
I often use he rather than she as the subject who does strong actions – ones that need being
done with a lot of strength, energy or navvy work. (Author 3)

Authors attributed this unconscious habit to being rooted in Vietnamese culture, which
‘always sees females as the weaker sex and one of their main responsibilities is cooking for
the family’. However, they said although they were still affected by this, their awareness of
gender had increased during the writing process. During the later phase, as the team
looked at some instances in some units where Pearson editors suggested, for example,
replacing the images of some famous men by those of women, Author 2 started to
consider gender issues. She now tried to use roughly the same numbers of he and she,
and male characters and female characters. Similar to Author 2, Author 3 became more
self-observant, letting more female characters take part in sports or do the work tradi­
tionally done only by men.
Regarding their own definition of gender equality, Author 3 said it means equal
opportunities for everyone in the society, ‘but how each person makes use of those
opportunities greatly depends on their characteristics, preferences, and their living and
learning environment’. Author 2 agreed with Author 3:
Gender equality means both sexes have same rights and responsibilities. If there are certain
jobs, fields, in certain times and places, they should be given to those of more capability or
those who will thrive in those conditions, regardless they are male or female. (Author 2)

In discussing whether conveying the concept of gender equality to students is possible,

Author 3 stated that lower secondary school students, and even primary school students,
can be made aware of gender equality in an indirect way.
For example, we can include female football teams besides male football teams in the text.
Although children may not be fully aware of what gender equality means, by looking at the
pictures and reading the texts or sentences in which females are presented in important
positions, they will gradually realise that if one has talent and determination, they can be in
high positions, regardless of their sex. (Author 3)
 PEDAGOGY, CULTURE & SOCIETY 493

Author 2, while agreeing with Author 3, was concerned whether teachers would see
subtle gender messages and convey them to students, because most usually try to cover
language skills and other explicit contents. Author 1 agreed with Author 2, adding the
textbook authors had to prioritise the topics’ content, vocabulary, grammar, and culture,
rather than gender issues. However, if it appeared there were too many male turns in one
dialogue, or items with only or almost all male characters, then this would be considered
problematic and revisions would be made for a more balanced gender representation.
All three authors, while acknowledging the needs for incorporating gender content in
English textbooks, thought the textbooks may not be the only main factor influencing
students’ thinking. Author 2 said breaking gender norms in the textbooks should happen
gradually so students ‘will not be shocked and resist to change’. Author 3 talked about
teachers’ role, saying when using textbooks, teachers should also notice and highlight
other content, for example, intercultural aspects. The authors suggested raising gender
awareness through clearer notes in Teacher Books, and in teacher training workshops.
Textbook authors themselves, they added, also need to pay closer attention to gender
bias during the writing process.
The interview indicates that gender was not a priority during the textbook writing.
External factors (having to juggle with other textbook content priorities) and internal
factors (authors’ own conscious and unconscious gender biases) explain the lack of
gender manifestations in the textbooks. The authors’ approach to introducing gender
into the textbooks was still largely geared towards a mechanical, quantitative presence of
men and women (e.g. number of female vs. male characters, number of turns), rather than
a critical, qualitative perspective that focuses on possible power hierarchies (e.g. gen­
dered attributes, roles, and behaviour). Also, gender was mostly seen as a subject area
separate from other elements (topic, vocabulary, grammar, and even culture), rather than
practices constructed via everyday social interaction and embedded in ideologies. More
subtle and sophisticated manifestations of gender bias seem to go unrecognised or are
considered normal. In other words, how women are presented was not considerably taken
into account (Namatende-Sakwa 2018). Nevertheless, the input from Pearson editors,
even if it was emergent rather than systematic, acted as an awareness-raising trigger for
the authors, facilitating their efforts in introducing gender equality in the books. The
interview also reveals the prevalence of patriarchal values in contemporary Vietnamese
society at large, as seen in authors’ concerns about how teachers and students would
react to any changes.

Conclusion and implications

The findings have provided insights into how gender is produced by language and
discourse (Sunderland 2004) in contemporary Vietnam. The books’ depiction of gender,
despite encouraging signals regarding gender equality, is still affected by gender norms
and bias ingrained in Confucianism ideology, amid a general gendered discourse that
disadvantages women seen elsewhere in the world. Both girls and boys are present in
private and public realms, and most notably, girls start to appear in more STEM conversa­
tions. However, boys and men still predominate across different aspects of ‘being pre­
sent’. They occupy larger verbal space and play more dominant conversational roles.
Males are selected to be the expert (e.g. sports, science, cultures, family legacy). They are
494 M. T. VU AND T. T. T. PHAM

curious and ambitious; they enjoy abundant life opportunities, aim high, and dare to
dream. Although boys start to be seen more doing some housework, it is mostly mothers
and girls who are associated with caretaking and other domestic duties, while the father is
largely absent from this sphere. Overall, females are less visible. Women’s societal con­
tribution and professional success, and even their roles and voices in the family, are not
sufficiently recognised and included. The depiction of girls still mirrors stereotypes: Not
only are girls expected to be in certain ways (e.g. having girly, easy hobbies), they are
depicted as less capable and independent; their choices are more limited, and they
receive less development resources than boys. The interview with the authors suggests
that the writing was influenced by both conscious and unconscious bias.
The findings echo what earlier research has revealed: there has been some progress
towards gender equality in textbooks, but overall it remains insufficient. For example, Lee
(2019) found that, in textbooks in Japan there was use of gender-neutral language and an
equal distribution of female and male speakers; but overall, women were underrepre­
sented; and stereotyping was prevalent. Pakuła, Pawelczyk, and Sunderland (2015, 56)
describe the findings in their Polish context study as ‘patchy’: some books showed evident
progress in portraying men and women as equal, but others were still influenced by
stereotypes.
Gender biases, both conscious and unconscious, against girls and women in instruc­
tional materials has implications for girls’ empowerment and advancement, especially in
a context with patriarchal traditions such as Vietnam. Meanwhile, bias against boys and
men deprive them of their rights (for example, to learn life skills such as cooking; and to
practice fatherhood). The existence of bias may all negatively influence students’ affective
and cognitive development (Lee 2019) and contribute to social inequalities (Kereszty
2009). When presented in instructional materials, these biases can lead learners to form or
reinforce limited views of particular gender groups, which can lead to stereotyped
expectations and even discrimination.
However, the study also suggests that it is not impossible to challenge the status quo.
The findings provide particular content in the books where a level playing field starts
being constructed, for both females and males. The study shows even though gender
perceptions may be grounded in long-lasting cultural ideologies, with awareness raising
input, and if some gender equality basics already exist, perceptions can be changed and
then translated into actions. As stated by the authors, their ideas of gender equality
became clearer especially later in the writing process. The Getting Started in Unit 11,
English 9, ‘Changing roles in society’, though still containing some limitations (as shown
earlier), can still be regarded as a watershed in attempts to reimagine gender roles in
some textbooks.
Awareness-raising and attitude-changing have been identified as essential in tackling
gender-based issues (e.g. Chowdhury et al. 2018). The findings of this study can be used to
inform the production, not only of the textbooks explored here, but also other textbook
series. For the textbooks analysed, as part of the process of publishing coursebooks
(Tomlinson and Masuhara 2018), a review of the completed series and a post-use evalua­
tion could be conducted by the writing team and the publisher. Gender bias needs to be
recognised, identified, and reacted to, both in terms of texts and images. Given the
influential roles of textbooks, authors may even consider subverting ideologies (Butler
1990) not only by reflecting the status quo, but also advocating for what could be for
 PEDAGOGY, CULTURE & SOCIETY 495

gender equality in Vietnam, especially if changing norms might be perceived as challen­

ging. Gender content can also be included in higher level policy including curriculum and
educational regulations. In this case, that gender roles was suggested in the curriculum is
one important step closer to gender equality, but gender could also be embraced
throughout the teaching topics (and hence instructional materials). Gender mainstream­
ing (Lombardo 2013) – informing all public policies so they counter gender bias in society,
can also be enabled. Gender thematic training could be provided to actors including
textbook writers, producers, teachers, and administrators. The role of teachers in addres­
sing the gender challenges needs to be recognised and supported too. Both awareness-
raising and pedagogical tools in working with gender could be provided so that teachers
not only detect possible gender biases in textbooks, but also enact their agency in using
textbook mandates to invite students to the gender equality discussion and realisation.

Note
1. The revised Vietnamese Education Law (June 2019) stipulates that schools can from now
on choose their own textbooks series within the national curriculum, provided that the series
has been approved by the Ministry of Education and Training and the Provincial People's
Committee.

Notes on this article

This article is developed from the following report: Mai Trang Vu & Pham Thi Thanh Thuy (2020).
Gender bias in English textbooks in Vietnam: Textbook representations, teacher perspectives, and
classroom practices. Project report Grant No HJ-127EE-17, National Geographic Society. http://www.
diva-portal.org

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful feedback on the
earlier versions of this article.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Funding
This project was supported by the National Geographic Society, Grant No HJ-127EE-17.

ORCID
Mai Trang Vu http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1001-6156
496 M. T. VU AND T. T. T. PHAM

References
Bhavnani, K., P. Chua, and D. Collins. 2014. “Critical Approaches to Qualitative Research.” In Oxford
Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by P. Leavy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Blumberg, R. L. 2008. “The Invisible Obstacle to Educational Equality: Gender Bias in Textbooks.”
Prospects 38 (3): 345–361. doi:10.1007/s11125-009-9086-1.
Butler, J. 1990. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. London: Routledge.
Carlson, M., and T. Kanci. 2017. “The Nationalised and Gendered Citizen in a Global World–Examples
from Textbooks, Policy and Steering Documents in Turkey and Sweden.” Gender and Education 29
(3): 313–331. doi:10.1080/09540253.2016.1143917.
Chowdhury, I., H. Johnson, A. Mannava, and E. Perova. 2018. “Gender Gap in Earnings in Vietnam:
Why Do Vietnamese Women Work in Lower Paid Occupations?”. Policy Research Working Paper,
No. 8433. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Coates, J. 2004. Women, Men and Language: A Sociolinguistic Account of Gender Differences in
Language. 3rd ed. Harlow: Longman.
Dang, T. C. T., and C. Seals. 2018. “An Evaluation of Primary English Textbooks in Vietnam:
A Sociolinguistic Perspective.” TESOL Journal 9 (1): 93–113. doi:10.1002/tesj.309.
Decision 01/QD-BGDDT, Ministry of Education and Training. 2012. English Language Curriculum for
Lower Secondary Education (Pilot). Hanoi: Ministry of Education and Training.
Grosse, I. 2015. “Gender Values in Vietnam – Between Confucianism, Communism, and
Modernization.” Asian Journal of Peacebuilding 3 (2): 253–272. doi:10.18588/201511.000045.
Gupta, M., J. Zhenghua, L. Bohua, X. Zhenming, W. Chung, and B. Hwa-Ok. 2003. “Why Is Son
Preference so Persistent in East and South Asia? A Cross-country Study of China, India and the
Republic of Korea.” Journal of Development Studies 40 (2): 153–187. doi:10.1080/
00220380412331293807.
Hanoitimes. September 21, 2020. “Vietnam Advances Greatly in Gender Equality, but Remains Far
from Full Equality: UN Women.” Retrieved from http://hanoitimes.vn/vietnam-advances-greatly-
in-gender-equality-but-remains-far-from-full-equality-un-women-314263.html
Hoang, V. V. 2018. “MoET’s Three Pilot English Language Communicational Curricula for Schools in
Vietnam: Rationale, Design and Implementation.” VNU Journal of Foreign Studies 34 (2): 1-25.
Hoang, V. V., T. C. Do, K. D. Le, C. N. Phan, M. T. Vu, Q. T. Luong, Q. T. Nguyen, Q. K. Luu, and D. Kaye.
2017. Tieng Anh 6, 7, 8, 9. Hanoi: Vietnam Education Publishing House and Pearson.
Jule, A. 2018. Speaking Up: Understanding Language and Gender. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Kereszty, O. 2009. “Gender in Textbooks.” Practice and Theory in Systems of Education 4 (2): 1–7.
Ledin, P., and D. Machin. 2018. Doing Visual Analysis: From Theory to Practice. London: Sage.
Lee, J. 2019. “In the Pursuit of a Gender-Equal Society: Do Japanese EFL Textbooks Play a Role?”
Journal of Gender Studies 28 (2): 204–217. doi:10.1080/09589236.2018.1423956.
Li, X. 2016. “Holding up Half the Sky? The Continuity and Change of Visual Gender Representation in
Elementary Language Textbooks in Post-Mao China.” Asian Journal of Women’s Studies 22 (4):
477–496. doi:10.1080/12259276.2016.1242945.
Lips, H. M. 2014. Gender: The Basics. London: Routledge.
Lombardo, E. 2013. “Gender Mainstreaming.” In Gender: The Key Concepts, edited by M. Evans and
C. H. Williams. London: Routledge, pp 112-117.
Mai, T. 2014. Đi Tìm Tổ Tiên Việt (In Search of the Vietnamese Ancestry). Hanoi: Vietnam Culture
Studies Publisher.
Mills, S. 2012. Gender Matters: Feminist Linguistic Analysis. London: Equinox.
Namatende-Sakwa, L. 2018. “The Construction of Gender in Ugandan English Textbooks: A Focus on
Gendered Discourses.” Pedagogy, Culture and Society 26 (4): 609–629.
Nguyen, T. T. M., R. Marlina, and T. H. P. Cao. 2020. “How Well Do ELT Textbooks Prepare Students to
Use English in Global Contexts? An Evaluation of the Vietnamese English Textbooks from an
English as an International Language (EIL) Perspective.” In Asian Englishes, 1–17.
Pakuła, Ł., J. Pawelczyk, and J. Sunderland. 2015. Gender and Sexuality in English Language Education:
Focus on Poland. London: British Council.
 PEDAGOGY, CULTURE & SOCIETY 497

Sadker, D. M., and K. Zittleman. 2007. Gender in the Classroom: Foundations, Skills, Methods, and
Strategies across the Curriculum. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Scharff, C. 2013. “Femininities.” In Gender: The Key Concepts, edited by M. Evans and C. H. Williams,
59–64. London: Routledge.
Sunderland, J. 2004. Gendered Discourses. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Tomlinson, B., and H. Masuhara. 2018. The Complete Guide to the Theory and Practice of Materials
Development for Language Learning. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell.
UNFPA. 2020. “State of World Population 2020.” Retrieved from https://www.unfpa.org/sites/
default/files/pub-pdf/UNFPA_PUB_2020_EN_State_of_World_Population.pdf
United Nations n.d. “Gender Equality.” viewed February 18 2021, https://www.un.org/en/sections/
issues-depth/gender-equality/
VnExpress. December 19, 2020. “Vietnam to Have 1.5 Million More Men than Women by 2034.”
Retrieved from https://e.vnexpress.net/news/news/vietnam-to-have-1-5-million-more-men-than
-women-by-2034-4208486.html
Vu, T. M., and H. Yamada. 2020. “The Legacy of Confucianism in Gender Inequality in Vietnam”.
MPRA Paper No. 101487. Retrieved from https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/101487/
World Economic Forum. 2018. “Global Gender Gap Report 2018.” Retrieved from http://www3.
weforum.org/docs/WEF_GGGR_2018.pdf