LGBT representation in ELT

There is an idea that English language teachers working abroad tend to be open-minded liberals, who appreciate and embrace variety - the proverbial spice of life. I understand this is a generalisation and that there may be significant areas of ELT where this is not the case, but in fact, it is largely true of my experience. I suspect if we asked a random selection of (British) English language teachers about newspapers they read, The Guardian would be top of the list.

As well as working alongside these liberal colleagues, since day one in ELT, I have taught, taught with, and been taught by people who could be described as part of the LGBT community.

Yet, it’s been apparent to me for some time that there is a a conflict here. It’s a conflict which arises in several areas, but which seems to be most prevalent in the development of materials for the classroom. Put simply, there is quite clearly a lack of LGBT representation in ELT materials.

I remember one time setting up a listening activity in class, and one of the speakers mentioned his “partner” and my ears immediately perked up. Could this be it? The first time that a listening included a character who wasn’t heterosexual? Of course not. Seconds later the man described his partner and “her” restaurant preferences. If you’re an English teacher, you may well have encountered this situation too.

The evidence

Before we start, I think it’s important to point out that I have no academic background in this area. I also understand that it’s a highly politicised and headline grabbing topic at the moment and that this blog is not a political one. It’s a blog which focuses on evidence-based teaching and how research might inform classroom practice.

However, research has been done on this topic, and there is, therefore, a need for a wider discussion on it — one which is open to all. Shutting down the discussion, from either side of the political divide, is not something I think should be encouraged. Research provides us with evidence, and we must decide how to interpret and use that evidence in a way that benefits society (or our teaching practice!) the most.

I’d been thinking about writing on this topic for a while, but the final nudge came when I watched the video of this excellent plenary talk by John Gray at IATEFL 2019, Gender and sexuality in ELT — inclusive education vs. queer pedagogy. You can view it here and I highly recommend that you do.

I’m going to briefly highlight here some of the research he covers, and afterwards, I’ll also add a couple of my own thoughts based on my classroom experiences.

• Firstly, a note on terminology. In his talk, Gray mostly uses the term ‘LGBT’ to refer to those who self-identity as lesbian, gay, bi or trans. He does use the term 'queer' (and other terms for gender/sexuality) and makes some interesting assertions about it, but he nevertheless sticks to LGBT. As you can see, I’ve deferred to his terminology. (When English language teaching meets gender/sexuality discourse, you can guarantee there are going to be a fair few confusing abbreviations thrown around!)
• At the start of his talk, Gray cites previous literature on the topic, such as Alastair Pennycook’s 20-year-old research about the absence of LGBT representation. Gray asserts that little has changed in that time, as supported by his own more recent research on the topic, and that of others.
• Gray highlights that this “gay erasure” is also present in test making materials, another lucrative area of ELT teaching. He gives an example of where it also extends to “non-standard” family archetypes, whereby a materials creator for a popular English language test suggested during a standardisation meeting that a text featuring a single mother be changed so that she is married. That way, the material wouldn’t impact negatively on test-takers from more conservative backgrounds. As Gray points out, there is no consideration given to the test-takers who are single mothers; their family-type is essentially erased from the testing materials.
• He then cites further evidence that this “invisibilising” can produce “serious psychological damage” and damage a group’s “ability to function in wider society”, as discussed by the sociologist Andrew Sayer in The Moral Significance of Class.
• Discussing the growing consensus for action, Gray refers to the 2016 UNESCO report Out in the Open, which states that an effort should be made to ensure members of “previously erased or marginalised groups” feel included in the learning process as equals. Similarly, those who are not part of those groups should be “given the opportunity to learn about the complexity of the world in which they live”.
• Finally, Gray points to further reading on the topic, other organisations which are attempting to address this issue, and possible steps English language teachers might take. The latter part, the action that we should take on this issue, is perhaps where the true controversy lies, even among those who are already convinced about the need for more inclusivity in education.
• If you are interested, I encourage you to watch the video and share your own ideas, but first, here is my attempt to weigh in on the topic.

My thoughts

In his talk, Gray highlights possible reasons for the lack of LGBT representation in materials, the most convincing of which, for me, is that they will become less marketable in more conservative teaching contexts. However, I think debate on this topic falls outside the remit of this blog. Conveniently, it’s also a very thorny issue which I’m happy to avoid.

Instead, if we stick to principles of evidence, research and the scientific method, I think we will find that we are on safer ground, and perhaps, much stronger ground.

Homosexuality exists. The mere biological fact that some people are attracted to members of the same sex is not a scientifically controversial one.

There are aspects of transsexualism, intersex and a whole host of newly popularised terminology (binary, cis, etc.) that is currently trying to reconcile itself with science, language, and politics. As you would expect, there is comparatively less research on these newer concepts of gender and sexuality; however, there seems to be enough of it to suggest that we should at the very least be treating it as an area for further study and above all, respect and understanding.

It’s also worth pointing out though that, despite increasing numbers of people identifying as LGBT, these groups remain in the minority.

This is a factor which needs to be taken into account when making key decisions in terms of awareness raising and (both over and under) representation. The conclusion I would like to draw from this, as an English language teacher, is that we should be mindful of this minority and that the a lot of current published materials are unrepresentative of them.

Like others, I try to navigate this by making accommodations in my own teaching to be inclusive and avoid gender or hetero normative reinforcement. If the kids are designing outfits, the boys can design girl clothes if they want and should be defended if this choice is mocked by their classmates. Similarly, in a speed dating game with teenagers or adults, male and female students should mingle indiscriminate of gender or sexuality - this makes it a lot easier to run this kind of activity anyway!

I remember a teens class in Hungary where one girl had complained about a gay couple kissing next to her on the bus and how disgusting it was. I asked her, if it had been a straight couple kissing next to her (Hungary is known for its “PDA”), if that would have made her feel any differently. She admitted that no, that would also have been disgusting. I didn’t preach and I wasn’t prescriptive: she was young and I think we should be careful very about judging young people’s opinions. I simply asked her a question to reflect on what it was that she was actually unhappy about.

Before I virtue signal any harder, I should confess that it was the youngest boy in the class who probably made the real impact that day. He had done a bit of travelling with his family and was shocked to hear his classmates’ views on same-sex relationships. His eyebrows raised as he struggled to understand their objections, he blurted

“but if they love each other, then who cares!?”

I’ll never forget the feeling of watching the boy who the others sometimes teased for being younger and more childish, say something so profoundly mature.

While making accommodations like these might seem obvious to some, it’s still easy to overlook them when planning lessons. Recently during an Easter Egg hunt activity, the convoluted clue I presented to the students was “The person whose husband works in the place where chickens live” (grammar point: relative pronouns, go figure). When I gave the answer as “The farmer’s wife” a student immediately piped up “or husband!”.

My fear though, is that these accommodations are not enough. And while I am wary that there is a heavy-handed, and cynical alternative approach, whereby lessons become overburdened by a focus on this topic, I still feel that there is a current deficit in the majority of English language teaching and testing materials.

There seems to me to be a willingness to embrace cultural diversity in some specific areas of materials creation, and yet a complete reinforcement of gender/heteronormative stereotypes in others. This may be done to appease cultural sensitivities in some areas, but it is having a detrimental effect on LGBT students throughout the world.

I’m not suggesting that English language teaching should be an imperialistic civilising mission, but how can it be that something like homosexuality, which has been relatively uncontroversial in the modern English speaking world for so long, how can it be that it’s still so underrepresented? Why is that I have to constantly adapt my materials to ensure my LGBT students feel included, especially when it seems like the first steps towards inclusion are so easy to make?

Incorporate non-standard family types into the relevant topic areas.

Have just one listening or reading where someone refers to their same-sex partner.

What about region specific book editions?

Many publishers where I teach publish “Spanish Editions” of their books with handy grammar comparisons and references to Spanish culture. Given that Spain one was of the first countries to legalise same-sex marriage, how hard would it be for one of the publishers just to swap an Alejandro for Alejandra (or vice-versa)?

My final thought, and another impetus behind writing this article, lies with young learners. While I agree that they shouldn’t be introduced to concepts before they are mature enough, we also shouldn’t forget — these young students are judging us by their standards, and the standards of the world that they will grow up in, not by our own standards.

Throughout the world of education, teachers should be preparing students for the future they will encounter, whether the subject is language or biology. Those students will judge us by how well we prepared them for tomorrow’s world, not for yesterday’s, and I’m afraid I agree with Gray’s assertion that ELT is failing to do so with respect to LGBT representation.

For more articles on research and education, check out the ALMAR page on Medium or follow the blog on Facebook.