Language, sexuality and inclusive pedagogy

Abstract

This paper examines linguistic practices of inclusion and exclusion relating to sexual orientation and sexual identity as they surface in the context of language education and multilingual contexts. I argue that queer linguistics can provide a helpful theoretical framework for examining how normative and non-normative constructions of sexual identity are enacted inscribed in language practices in classrooms, and how these language practices may effect particular discourses of sexuality. I examine extracts of interview data with young people analysed using APPRAISAL analysis. The analysis focuses on how language works as a form of social practice which can include and exclude sexual identities in classroom settings. KEYWORDS inclusion, inclusive pedagogy, language, queer linguistics, sexuality Cet article examine les pratiques linguistiques d'inclusion et d'exclusion relatives à l'orientation sexuelle et à l'identité sexuelle, telles qu'elles apparaissent dans le contexte de l'éducation aux langues et des contextes multilingues. Je soutiens que la linguistique queer peut fournir un cadre théorique utile pour examiner comment les constructions normatives et non normatives de l'identité sexuelle sont inscrites dans les pratiques linguistiques en classe et comment ces pratiques linguistiques peuvent influer sur des discours particuliers sur la sexualité. J'examine des extraits de données d'entretiens avec des jeunes analysés à l'aide de l'analyse APPRAISAL. L'analyse se concentre sur la manière dont la langue fonctionne comme une forme de pratique

Street-Level Pedagogy: Fostering and Communicating Social Equity Through Course Syllabi

“…The never-ending battleground in inclusive pedagogy is often centered on demonstrating why and how these efforts are important and how they impact students. For most students, the best learning environment is one where they are engaged, and one method of accomplishing that is to create a learning environment where all students can see themselves and feel valued as an opening mechanism for engagement (Addy et al, 2021; Evans & Knepper, 2021; Finkelstein et al, 2021; Harris et al, 2020; Hogan & Sathy, 2022; Matsiliza, 2020; Sauntson, 2019; Zidani, 2021). The nonprofit sector has traditionally been the voice for the voiceless, advocating for underrepresented populations and issues, and fighting to increase access, representation, and equity (Berry, 2005).…”

“…Inclusive pedagogy, at its core, is emancipatory, focusing on changing traditional power dynamics and creating an environment that signals the value of a broad range of voices and perspectives (Hahna, 2013; Lamantia et al, 2016). Attention often focuses on course content (Evans & Knepper, 2021; Phull et al, 2019), syllabi as communication devices (Fornaciari & Dean, 2014), language (Sauntson, 2019; Welch & Norris, 2020), and alternative platforms, assignments, and assessments (Creasap, 2014; Guillard, 2012). Recent studies have focused on diversifying pedagogy in regard to gender and other demographics, often under the heading “decolonizing” (Mantz, 2019; Matsiliza, 2020; Phull et al, 2019; Zidani, 2021), or critical pedagogy (Mason et al, 2020; Mirabella et al, 2023).…”

Gender‐just language teaching and linguistic competence development

“…As a part of a broad turn toward pedagogies that engage with both learners and educators as whole persons, TAQIBPs focus on how gender inflects language teaching and learning. They thus exist in conversation with, but simultaneously depart from a history of sexuality-focused work in queer applied linguistics (e.g., Cahnmann-Taylor & Coda, 2018;Moore, 2016Moore, , 2020Nelson, 2009;Paiz, 2020;Paiz & Coda, 2021;Sauntson, 2017). In keeping, TAQIBPs offer a theoretical frame that can encompass and move beyond various introductory approaches to treating gender more expansively in language courses (e.g., Knisely, 2022aKnisely, , 2022bKosnick, 2019;Provitola, 2019).…”

CLIL and Comprehensive Sexual Education: A Case of Innovation From Argentina

“…With interrelated foci, scholars have addressed gender as a multifaceted construct in second language learning: inclusive pedagogies (Sauntson, 2018), identity (Nguyen & Yang, 2015;Norton & Pavlenko, 2004), lgbt learners' trajectories and classroom participation (Evripidou, 2018a; Moore, 2016), interaction from feminist poststructuralism (Pavlenko, 2004), teacher preparation (Mojica & Castañeda-Peña, 2017), teachers' perceptions (Evripidou, 2018b), coursebooks (Ariyanto, 2018;Gray, 2013), teacher-developed materials (Govender, 2019), and awareness raising in educational communities (Pakuła et al, 2015). These studies, from a praxiological notion, are unified by the following stance: elt cannot ignore human action; it should adopt an attitude that allows learners to understand the purposes behind human behaviour and the diversity of actions found across institutions and social practices.…”