




































 Derichsweiler 1 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 1–10 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373 

Gender-Oriented Topics in Teaching English as an Additional Language 

 

Sina Derichsweiler 

University of Cologne 

 

Abstract 

 

Given the great influence gender identity issues have in educational settings, it is critical to 

understand how students, especially in the K–12 context, are affected and how this contributes to 

their academic success. This article deals with the potential that lies in teaching topics of gender 

identity in the additional language classroom. Drawing on recent research in the German context 

related to language and culture and gender-oriented topics in English as an additional language 

(EAL) provides an international perspective. Exemplified through the German school context, 

the need to incorporate more gender-oriented topics into teaching is emphasized. The aim is to 

provide an understanding of topics related to gender and sexual orientation independent of the 

subject matter and to highlight some opportune teaching moments. In doing so, the role of the 

school as an agent of socialization and education in connection to topics of gender identity is 

explained, followed by an introduction to the field of gender studies in order to point out the 

main aspects to consider when planning a lesson for EAL. To make the theoretical field more 

accessible, three teaching examples for primary school and early secondary school research 

settings are presented. 

 

Introduction 

 

Canadian school policies have gained worldwide recognition for their inclusive and forward-

thinking approaches. One excellent example is the British Columbia (BC) Sexual Orientation 

and Gender Identity (SOGI) Educator Network. Formally launched as a pilot project in 

2016/2017, it is now, four years later, an inherent part of BC’s education system (SOGI 123, 

2020). Its aim is to connect BC educators interested in SOGI-inclusive education, and it is 

successfully doing so: “All 60 B.C. school districts and several independent schools have joined 

the B.C. SOGI Educator Network to further help educators make schools safe and inclusive for 

students of all sexual orientations and gender identities” (Ministry of Education, 2019). SOGI 

123 was designed to help all educators interested in SOGI-inclusive education. In alignment with 

BC’s new curriculum, SOGI 123 provides grade-appropriate teaching material to help everyone 

understand today’s diverse society (SOGI 123, 2020). In 2019, however, the BC Ministry of 

Education stated that 64% of queer and transgender students in Canada still feel unsafe at school, 

which underlines once more the need for furthering SOGI-inclusive education.  

 

 This fact alone justifies the importance of extending teaching material that helps foster 

SOGI-inclusive education. This paper will argue that the field of teaching English as an 

additional language (TEAL) is particularly suitable for helping students address topics of gender 

identity. It therefore addresses a still-prevalent research gap of gender-oriented publications and 

teaching methods in TEAL and introduces work from Germany on the subject matter. This gives 

educators from BC interested in SOGI-inclusive education in a TEAL context the opportunity to 

broaden their perspective as they acquire insights into TEAL in Germany.  

 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373


 Derichsweiler 2 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 1–10 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373 

 In the following, two subjects will be addressed: firstly, topics of gender identity in 

TEAL and secondly, the omnipresence of gender identity at school. These topics will draw on 

the German school system as an exemplary case to emphasize the need to include more gender-

oriented topics into schools and furthermore to encourage awareness of important aspects to 

consider when planning a school lesson with a focus on gender identity. Three teaching 

examples are introduced to substantiate the theoretical positions explained in the first section of 

this paper. Its structure and argument follow a survey of the implications of gender studies for 

foreign language teaching (König, Lewin, & Surkamp, 2016), complementing it by adding 

perspectives from primary school and early secondary school research settings. 

 

Topics of Gender in TEAL  
 

Two recent publications, by Thorsen Merse (2017) and Lotta König (2018), are cases in point of 

cutting-edge publications about SOGI-Inclusive education. In his PhD dissertation, Other 

Others, Different Differences: Queer Perspectives on Teaching English as a Foreign Language, 

published in 2017, Merse discussed and differentiated current discourses in the fields of 

education and TEAL with the aim of developing the theoretical foundation for queer approaches 

in English language teaching. König’s PhD dissertation, Gender-Reflexion mit Literatur im 

Englischunterricht (Reflection on Gender Through Literature in the English Classroom), which 

was published in 2018, develops the concept of gender-reflection for students and explains its 

necessity. König suggested ways of implementing gender in TEAL and provided various 

teaching examples as well as empirical validations of her theoretical ideas. In their different 

ways, both scholars pointed to the benefits and the need of gender topics for TEAL and identifed 

three important subject areas—language learning, inter and transcultural learning, and discourse 

competence—that benefit from gender-oriented topics.  

 

 With regard to the specificities of language learning, it is argued that students’ additional 

languages hold the potential for them to approach the topic of gender without the directness of 

their own linguistic environment. This potential provides students with a distanced perspective 

on classroom communication that allows involvement from a “safe distance.” In light of research 

suggesting that different contexts, domains of life, and languages allow for different impressions, 

attitudes, and behaviours, learning other languages does not lead to a change of personality as 

such, but to improving the expression of another part of one’s personality that can be shown in 

other languages (Prentis, 2017, Grosjean, 2012). Hence, students might be able to take part in 

classroom discussions with a lower risk of triggering fears or resistance when dealing with the 

topic (König, Lewin, & Surkamp, 2016; Merse, 2017). Secondly, inter and transcultural learning 

are constitutional parts of acquiring an additional language. New perspectives and cultures are 

accessed, which might lead to a reflection of unquestioned certainties in students’ lives. König, 

Lewin, and Surkamp (2016) explain that  

 

The ability to change perspective, which is an important learning goal in this 

framework, can also be applied to the cultural category of gender. Since the 

concepts and attitudes inherent to our own culture are very powerful in shaping our 

perception of the world, the ability to depart from one’s own perspective is very 

important: only then are students able to see the norms and reflect on them as such 

(p. 22).   

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373


 Derichsweiler 3 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 1–10 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373 

 Thirdly, the topic of gender enables the development of discourse competence. On the 

one hand, gender is produced discursively (commonly called doing gender) not only through 

clothes and behaviour, but also by using language. In talking about this phenomenon (doing 

gender), students elaborate on gender by way of a meta-discourse. Consequently, students also 

gain language awareness and can reflect on the power of language (König, Lewin, & Surkamp, 

2016; Merse, 2017). One example that emphasizes the interdependency of language and gender 

discourse in the additional language classroom was observed by Cynthia Nelson (2009):  

 

In one of the first English as a Second Language (ESL) lessons that I observed…, the 

class was going through a grammar exercise on adverb clauses. One student gave his 

answer: “When I love someone, I tell him.” Amid muted laughter, the teacher said “Try it 

again.” With far less certainty the student ventured “When I love someone, I tell he?” 

Eventually, he provided an answer that satisfied the teacher: “When I love someone, I tell 

her.” (p. ix)  

 

In this situation, the teacher’s assumption that the student has not understood the grammatical 

exercise betrays the teacher’s heteronormative world view and a lack of critical language 

awareness.  

 

Gender Identity Issues at School  

 

The omnipresence of gender becomes apparent when trying to identify contexts in which gender 

does not play a significant role at all (Elsner & Lohe, 2016). Concepts of femininity and 

masculinity and of romantic/sexual relationships are strongly connected to all kinds of cultural 

expectations, patterns of interpretation, and social interactions (König, Lewin, & Surkamp, 

2016). Likewise, the variety of life concepts is steadily increasing. Liberal societies constantly 

integrate new ideas pertaining to lifestyles, familial relations, and identity. At the same time, 

traditional concepts of femininity and masculinity are still predominant today and strongly 

impact students’ lives (König, Lewin, & Surkamp, 2016). Since the engagement with gender 

identity evolves largely during the years at school, the educational field has the responsibility to 

support students in their development and decision making (Elsner & Lohe, 2016). 

 

 Commonly, it is argued that the school has a double function in the capacity of acting: 

school is being both an agent of socialization and an agent of education (König, Lewin, & 

Surkamp, 2016). The next section discusses these two agencies in connection to gender identity. 

Firstly, the role of the school as an agent of socialization is introduced, followed, secondly, by 

the depiction of the school as an agent of education to initiate the next section of this paper about 

“queering” the English language classroom. 

 

The School as an Agent of Socialization 

 

Schooling can be defined as organized instructional activity in which the teacher has the explicit 

task of socializing children. Children today spend the majority of their active hours at school or 

in a school context. The school is the first large-scale institution of which children become 

members and which reflects the expectations and norms of society. It goes without saying that 

school therefore plays a major part in constructing and upholding dominant gender differences 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373


 Derichsweiler 4 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 1–10 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373 

and gender relations. The school is a place where gender is performed in interactions between 

students, between students and teachers, and between teachers. In most situations, gender is not 

sufficiently addressed and problematized at school. This missing element reinforces gender 

inequalities that can and tend to impact the career interests and life plans of students (König, 

Lewin, & Surkamp, 2016).  

 

 The concept of heteronormativity helps illustrate the crucial socialising function of 

schools. This concept understands heterosexuality as a central power structure that dominates 

social and cultural areas in Western societies. Analyses of heteronormativity seek to challenge 

the common understanding that heterosexuality is to be seen as natural, definite, and fixed. 

Sexual identities besides heterosexuality are therefore often seen as a deviation from the norm 

(Katz, 2009; Richardson, 1998). That heteronormativity is not or is only rarely called into 

question at school can be seen in the field of career orientation at school. The school, as an agent 

of socialization, is responsible for educating and introducing students to the job market’s variety, 

especially because the gender gap in the job market is extensive. The fact that certain jobs are 

ascribed to be rather male or female is also mirrored in the education of career orientation at 

school (Bartsch & Wedl, 2015, Thiessen & Tremel, 2015). This is why Barbara Thiessen and 

Inken Tremel (2015) demanded that career orientation always be taught in connection to gender 

and point to various studies highlighting the strong connection between gender and job choices 

made by young adults (Besen-Cassino, 2018; Thiessen & Tremel, 2015). 

 

 Moreover, the school is a place in which doing gender takes place. The concept of doing 

gender belongs to a constructivist perspective in gender studies. It establishes the assumption 

that gender is not an essential feature of a person, but constantly produced in social interactions 

(Degele, 2008). Doing gender happens through, for example, clothes, gestures, behaviour, or 

communication. Lewin, Surkamp, and König (2016) emphasized that these ways of doing gender 

at school are by no means arbitrary. The students are “connected to their gender categorization 

and are expected to conform to it at any time or she/he risks discrimination” (p. 25). Hence, 

students not only learn how to perform their gender identity in social interactions with their 

families, but also extensively in interdependency with their classmates at school. As pointed out 

before, one consequence of doing gender in nonconformity with standards of heteronormativity 

is the risk of discrimination. Documented evidence indicates that queer youth regularly 

experience discrimination and harassment at school because of their sexual orientation and/or 

gender identity. In 2018, a study published by the German Youth Institute (DJI), one of the 

biggest social science research institutes in Europe, found that eight out of ten queer students 

stated that they have experienced harassment because of their gender identity. Also, queer youth 

are almost four times as likely to have attempted suicide compared to heterosexual youth in 

Germany (DJI, 2018).  

 

The School as an Agent of Education 

 

As an agent of education, the school has precisely the task to support students in the 

development of their individual personality. König, Lewin, and Surkamp (2016) argued that “it is 

part of the educational mandate of schools in Germany to support students in developing 

fundamental ethical principles, which include respect, justice, tolerance toward others, and 

gender equality” (p. 21). Therefore, education about gender and the inclusion of teaching 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373


 Derichsweiler 5 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 1–10 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373 

material and methods that help students gain a self-confident attitude towards their own gender 

identity and sexual orientation are particularly important. In terms of critical thinking, 

educational practices should question and criticize heteronormative power structures in our 

society.  

 

  Furthermore, school education is still dominated by a hidden curriculum, which is 

shaped by heteronormative assumptions. The concept of a hidden curriculum emphasizes that 

education is never objective, but is structured through the transmission of unexpressed norms, 

values, and beliefs. All teaching content entails notions which are learned but not openly 

intended, such as heteronormativity (Onnen, 2015). That such unexpressed values influence the 

design of teaching materials, for instance, is one of the many aspects that “learning gender” takes 

into account. In 2011, Melanie Bittner published a survey about the depiction of gender in 

contemporary school books in Germany. Her study revealed that school books transport one-

dimensional ideas about gender. Her findings showed that the binary thinking about gender and 

heteronormativity is emphasized by depicting characters in traditional roles, ascribing 

stereotypical characteristics to them, and portraying their outer appearance as explicitly male or 

female. Utterances made by characters such as “No, you don’t. You never do jobs around the 

house. Boys have an easy life” (Bittner, 2011, p. 42) or “Girls cannot play football” (Bittner, 

2011, p. 41) are commonly found in English language school books. Life concepts, gender 

identities, or sexual orientations that do not conform to the demands of heteronormativity are not 

offered. In a similar context, Lukasz Pakula, Joanna Pawelczyk, and Jane Sunderland (2015) 

explained that “if equal numbers are represented, but women and men, girls and boys are 

represented in stereotypical, limited or degrading ways, this may similarly affect self-image, as 

may a relentless, unchallenged heteronormativity for those (many) students who are not 

heterosexual” (p. 13). Since school books are supposed to help pupils construct new knowledge 

and behaviours and consequently influence social reality, these results are particularly alarming 

(Elsner & Lohe, 2016). 

 

 In the process of designing methods and material to teach gender-oriented topics, Jutta 

Hartmann, one of the leading researchers in the field of heteronormative critiques in education, 

highlighted the importance of positive visions for students. Often students are confronted with 

negative stereotypes as a method of questioning gendered attributions. However, in pointing out 

stereotypes in the first place, the problem arises that these stereotypes might be strengthened all 

the same. In applying positive examples of gender identities or sexual orientations to everyday 

teaching, alternatives are visualized for the students (Hartmann, Messerschmidt, & Thon, 2017). 

 

Three Perspectives of Gender Studies 

 

It is also essential for teachers to have fundamental knowledge about gender studies in order to 

teach gender. Following König, Lewin, and Surkamp’s (2016) approach, this article addresses 

three main approaches of gender studies by sharing three teaching examples—one for each 

approach. The teaching examples were designed by students of the University of Cologne, who 

eagerly discussed the theoretical approaches and developed examples for TEAL in one of their 

teaching seminars.  

 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373


 Derichsweiler 6 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 1–10 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373 

 In her introduction to Gender/Queer Studies, Nina Degele (2018) differentiated and 

explained three dominant schools of thought in feminist studies: the socio-critical, the 

constructivist, and the deconstructivist perspectives (p. 14). In the process of planning a school 

lesson that includes aspects of gender, it is important to be aware of the central questions each 

perspective focuses on. Only then are teachers able to formulate learning goals that take full 

advantage of insights from gender and queer studies and adequately translate them into teaching 

practice. Without a reflective and profound approach, well-meaning attempts to include topics of 

gender in school lessons can have unpredictable effects and even strengthen stereotypes (König, 

2018). 

 

 The socio-critical perspective is mainly concerned with problematic aspects of gender 

hierarchies based on the division of humans into men and women. Gender is seen as a social 

category, and the main focus is on the disclosure of structural inequalities based on forms of 

binary thinking in heteronormative societies. The binary distinction of human beings into male 

and female leads to hierarchies in which white males are the most privileged ones. The job 

market is one example for persisting gender inequalities that need to be a subject of discussion 

with students at school.  

 

 The first teaching example is based on the school book Camden Town 4, published by 

Diesterweg (Hanus, 2015). It was designed for students in Grade 8 enrolled in a middle school. 

The tasks in the school book are concerned with various jobs that are suitable for 14-year-old 

teenagers. The introduction to the section on jobs informs students about legal aspects for 

working as a teenager and then introduces six different jobs: a sign waver, a gas station 

attendant, a babysitter, a farmhand, a newspaper carrier, and a pet sitter. The text itself does not 

assign jobs to a certain gender. In the description for the job at the gas station, it says for 

example: “However, he or she cannot work as a cashier” (Hanus, 2015, p. 64). The pictures 

illustrating the book’s page nevertheless portray traditional ideas about which gender works in 

what domain. A boy is depicted for the job at a gas station and a girl for the job as a pet sitter. 

Hereby, the book reinforces heteronormative assumptions about career opportunities for girls and 

boys. The given socio-critical teaching example builds its lesson on this circumstance. To get the 

students started, the text is read out loud. The next task involves a writing exercise. Each student 

is assigned a job and is supposed to imagine a successful and fun day in this job. The teacher 

makes sure that the boys get jobs that are rather considered to be female and the other way 

around. Therefore, students can have positive associations with different jobs independently of 

gender-related preferences. Consequently, the introduction of new perspectives and the 

broadening of students’ horizons are important. As pointed out above, Hartmann, 

Messerschmidt, and Thon (2017) recommended the establishment of positive examples without 

focusing on stereotypes beforehand and called this way of proceeding a “post heteronormative” 

strategy. The lesson ends with the students’ presentation of their day at work, which could lead 

to a discussion about the connection between gender and the job market. However, the outcome 

is not predictable in advance. The students might, for example, already be so open minded that 

they do not see problems in boys having jobs as babysitters or girls having jobs at gas stations. It 

is up to the teachers to decide whether or not it is necessary to further discuss this topic.  

 

 The constructivist perspective analyzes how gender is produced in social interaction. It 

focusses on restrictions that are imposed by heteronormative assumptions about the “right” 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373


 Derichsweiler 7 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 1–10 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373 

behaviour for men and women. The concept of doing gender is one main idea of the 

constructivist approach in gender studies. In a school setting, students are supposed to 

understand how gender differences are made by society and that gender is not an essential 

feature of a person, but something that is constantly constructed. König, Lewin, and Surkamp 

(2016) pointed out that  

 

In class, practices of “doing gender” are particularly accessible for students in areas 

in which notions of masculinity and femininity are strategically applied—for 

example in advertising. Normative gender expectations, however, can also be 

reflected in terms of activities or hobbies that are considered appropriate for 

“doing” masculinity, but not femininity—or vice versa.” (p. 25) 

 

 The next teaching example takes up the idea to use students’ hobbies as a target point for 

discussion. Thereby, the daily life of students is introduced to the classroom and hence, a 

relationship to their world is given. Only when students experience some sort of personal 

relevance of an issue or shortcoming do they get actively involved in the process of solving it. 

The lesson was designed for students in Grade 5. The teacher posts a chart with the headline 

What kind of things do you like doing? A number of students are supposed to share their ideas, 

probably such as reading, singing, playing football, and so on. The teacher simultaneously writes 

down the students’ ideas on the blackboard. Each student then gets a sticky note with their name 

on it and is supposed to put their sticky note next to their favourite activity. When all sticky notes 

are posted, students can utter their favourite activity and ask who also likes to do this activity. 

The teacher then asks the class if they ever feel excluded from an activity because it is supposed 

to be for boys or girls instead of all students. If there are such activities on the board, students 

can work in small groups and think of ways they can help all kids at school feel included in the 

activities they like. The overall aim is to make students aware that there are no activities that are 

more suitable for girls or boys. Their hobbies should just be based on what they like and what 

they are good at, and not on their gender identity. The lesson could be followed by watching and 

discussing a movie such as Billy Elliot (Daldry, 2000), in which a boy becomes a professional 

ballet dancer. 

 

 The last teaching example is based on the deconstructive perspective, which aims to 

question the supposedly natural characteristics of gender. The deconstructive perspective aims to 

detect exclusions based on gender norms, challenge ideas of heteronormativity, and question 

structures of power in society. Scholars such as Judith Butler (1990) have emphasized the 

performativity of gender and its establishment through the repetition and enactment of gendered 

behaviour by being cited again and again. For Butler, the distinction of sex and gender is not 

valid because sex could also be understood as discursive. In this sense, sex and gender are 

culturally constructed concepts and the result of the predominant discourse of each time period. 

 

 The focal point in this teaching example is based on the concept of undoing gender. The 

teaching example is designed for a Grade 8 or Grade 9 class. It is based on the novel The Art of 

Being Normal (2016), written by Lisa Williamson, in which the main character wants to be 

gender fluid. The students get a fictional diary entry without knowing the main character’s name 

or gender identity. The text implies both a female and a male person, depending on the way it is 

read. The teacher reveals that the main character wants to be categorized neither as female nor as 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373


 Derichsweiler 8 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 1–10 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373 

male. The character can rather be described as gender fluid. A gender-fluid person’s identity 

does not conform to the heterosexual world order because their gender does not follow from a 

specific biological sex, and sexual desire does not derive from either sex or gender identity. The 

character in the diary entry provides critical opportunities to expose the limits and regulatory 

aims of the heterosexual world order. Importantly, the character in the text is not portrayed as 

deficient because the character does not conform to those norms of cultural intelligibility. The 

text emphasizes that gender can be thought of as radically different from sex. The students then 

work in groups to find out what gender fluidity means. In the following discussion they are 

supposed to understand that when identifiable differences between women and men are blurred, 

the heterosexual world order is weakened. Hence, students question the self-evidence of 

heteronormativity and binary gender.  

 

Conclusion 

 

The examples presented only serve as a first attempt to emphasize the broad range for 

conceptualizing and discussing an implementation of topics concerned with gender into TEAL 

and to add to extant research on gender-sensitive perspectives in educational settings. Educators 

from BC were given an international perspective, and teachers dealing with younger students 

might especially benefit from these insights as it was shown that it is possible to cover topics of 

gender independent of the students’ age. Often teaching examples in TEAL focus on older 

students because they are more reflective and advanced in their language proficiency and, hence, 

it is easier to discuss rather complicated topics with them. Furthermore, all the teaching examples 

in this paper tried to implement positive examples for students to identify with. These examples 

avoid strengthening dominant stereotypes by first addressing them in order to deconstruct them 

afterwards. The positive examples function as agents in opening up “new possibilities for gender 

that contest the rigid codes of hierarchical binarism” (Butler, 1990, p. 24). The teaching 

examples also show how the classroom is connected to experiences of everyday life. The 

teaching is shaped by and responds to problems that might arise anywhere in students’ lives. The 

combination of positive visions and the chance for students to explore their own role in society 

and in various discourse communities opens up the possibility to develop a deeper understanding 

of what those interconnections mean for them. As argued above, the school holds the 

responsibility to teach gender, and, in this process, should also deconstruct heteronormativity. 

The school, however, is a complex system combining a broad range of different expectations, 

ideas, tasks, and hierarchies. Reactions by oppositional organizations have proven that questions 

of gender identity and sexual orientation are often accompanied by emotions. These sensitive 

topics require negotiations of gender on the individual level, but also on a sociopolitical level 

(König, Lewin, & Surkamp, 2016, p. 21). 

 

Acknowledgements 

 

I wish to thank my supervisors, Roman Bartosch and Karen Ragoonaden, for their support during 

the research and writing process. I would also like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for 

their insightful feedback and the editor Scott Douglas for his publication guidance.   

  

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373


 Derichsweiler 9 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 1–10 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373 

References 

 

Bartsch, A., & Wedl, J. (2015). Teaching gender? Zum reflektierten Umgang mit Geschlecht im 

Schulunterricht und in der Lehramtsausbildung. In Teaching Gender? Zum reflektierten 

Umgang mit Geschlecht im Schulunterricht und in der Lehramtsausbildung, 

herausgegeben von Juliette Wedl und Annette Bartsch, 9–31. Bielefeld, DE: transcript 

Verlag. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839428221-002. 

Besen-Cassino, Y. (2017). The cost of being a girl: Working teens and the origins of the gender 

wage gap. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.  

Bittner, M. (2011). Geschlechterkonstruktionen und die Darstellung von Lesben, Schwulen, 

Bisexuellen, Trans* und Inter* (LSBTI) in Schulbüchern: eine gleichstellungsorientierte 

Analyse [mit einer Materialsammlung für die Unterrichtspraxis]. Frankfurt, DE: 

Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft.  

Butler, J. (1990) Gender trouble. New York, NY: Routledge.  

Daldry, S. (2000). Billy Elliot. Universal Focus. 

Degele, N. (2008). Gender, queer studies: Eine Einführung. Paderborn, DE: Fink.  

DJI Impulse. (2018). Jung und Queer. Über die Lebenssituation von Jugendlichen, die lesbisch, 

schwul, bisexuell, trans* oder queer sind. Das Forschungsmagazin des Deutschen 

Jugendinstituts 18 (2). Retrieved from 

https://www.dji.de/fileadmin/user_upload/bulletin/d_bull_d/bull120_d/DJI_2_18_Web.p

df  

Elsner, D., & Lohe, V. (2016). Gender and language learning. Tübingen, DE: Narr.  

Grosjean, F. (2012). Change of language, change of personality? Part II. Psychology Today. 

Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/life-bilingual/201212/change-

language-change-personality-part-ii  

Hanus, P. (2015). Camden town. 4, [Schülerbd.]: Gymnasium, [Neubearb.]. Braunschweig, DE: 

Diesterweg. 

Hartmann, J., Messerschmidt, A., & Thon, C. (2017). Queertheoretische Perspektiven auf 

Bildung: pädagogische Kritik der Heteronormativität. Jahrbuch Frauen- und 

Geschlechterforschung in der Erziehungswissenschaft, 13. Opladen, Berlin, Toronto, ON: 

Barbara Budrich.  

Katz, J. (2009). The Invention of heterosexuality. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2017.1333810  

König, L., Lewin, S., & Surkamp, C. (2016). What does it mean to teach about gender? In 

Gender and Language Learning, 19–36. Tübingen, DE: Narr. 

König, L. (2018). Gender-Reflexion mit Literatur im Englischunterricht. Literatur-, Kultur- und 

Sprachvermittlung: LiKuS. Wiesbaden, DE: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.  

Merse, T. (2017). Other others, different differences: Queer perspectives on teaching English as 

a foreign language. München, DE. https://doi.org/10.5282/edoc.20597  

Ministry of Education. (2019). More students supported by SOGI-inclusive education. Retrieved 

from https://archive.news.gov.bc.ca/releases/news_releases_2017-2021/2019EDUC0040-

000975.htm  

Nelson, C.D. (2009). Sexual identities in English language education: Classroom conversation. 

New York, NY: Routledge.  

  

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373
https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839428221-002
https://www.dji.de/fileadmin/user_upload/bulletin/d_bull_d/bull120_d/DJI_2_18_Web.pdf
https://www.dji.de/fileadmin/user_upload/bulletin/d_bull_d/bull120_d/DJI_2_18_Web.pdf
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/life-bilingual/201212/change-language-change-personality-part-ii
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/life-bilingual/201212/change-language-change-personality-part-ii
https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2017.1333810
https://doi.org/10.5282/edoc.20597
https://archive.news.gov.bc.ca/releases/news_releases_2017-2021/2019EDUC0040-000975.htm
https://archive.news.gov.bc.ca/releases/news_releases_2017-2021/2019EDUC0040-000975.htm


 Derichsweiler 10 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 1–10 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373 

Onnen, C. (2015). Studying gender to teach gender. Zur Vermittlung von Gender-Kompetenz. In 

Teaching Gender? Zum reflektierten Umgang mit Geschlecht im Schulunterricht und in 

der Lehramtsausbildung, 83-101. Bielefeld, DE: Transcript Verlag. 

https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839428221-002  

Pakula, L., Pawelczyk, J., & Sunderland, J. (2015). Gender and sexuality in English language 

education: Focus on Poland. London, UK: British Council.  

Prentis, N. (2017). Feel more fun in French? Your personality can change depending on the 

language you speak. Quartz. Retrieved from https://qz.com/925630/feel-more-fun-in-

french-your-personality-can-change-depending-on-the-language-you-speak/  

Richardson, D. (1998). Theorising heterosexuality: Telling it straight. Buckingham, UK: Open 

University Press 

SOGI 123. British Columbia. (2020). What’s happening in British Columbia? Retrieved from 

https://bc.sogieducation.org/sogi1  

Thiessen, B. & Tremel, I. (2015). “Aber im normalen Unterricht ist das für mich als normaler 

Lehrer eingentlich in meinen Fächern sehr schwierig” Herstellung von Gender-

Normalität im berufsorientierenden Unterricht. In Teaching Gender? Zum reflektierten 

Umgang mit Geschlecht im Schulunterricht und in der Lehramtsausbildung, 67–83. 

Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839428221-002  

Williamson, L. (2016). The art of being normal. New York, NY: Farrar Straus Giroux.  

 

 

 
The BC TEAL Journal is licensed under a 

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. 

Copyright rests with the author(s). 

 

 

 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.373
https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839428221-002
https://qz.com/925630/feel-more-fun-in-french-your-personality-can-change-depending-on-the-language-you-speak/
https://qz.com/925630/feel-more-fun-in-french-your-personality-can-change-depending-on-the-language-you-speak/
https://bc.sogieducation.org/sogi1
https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839428221-002
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

