The Exclusion and Inclusion of Women in American Government Textbooks

Olivo, Christiane

doi:10.1007/978-94-6091-912-1_9

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent studies of American government textbooks, in particular, have called for the need to broaden coverage beyond the “Civil Rights” chapters to address stereotypical images or depictions of African Americans (Allen & Wallace, 2010; Wallace & Allen, 2008), Latinos (Monforti & McGlynn, 2010), the religious perceptions and portrayal of people of faith (Eisenstein & Clark, 2013), and to “mainstream” and make visible the “hidden curriculum” on gender content in introductory-level textbooks (Cassese & Bos, 2013; Cassese et al, 2014) beyond the almost exclusive focus on “white middle-class women” (Olivo, 2012, p. 131), as well as to include the intersectionality of gender, race, ethnicity, and class. Cassese and Bos (2013) observe, [v]arious social categories like race, gender, and sexual orientation are typically lumped together in a rather generic nod to [one’s underrepresented] status.…”

Section: Previous Studies On Introductory Textbooksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Affirmative Action Debates in American Government Introductory Textbooks

Wallace

Allen²

2016

Journal of Black Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Affirmative action debates remain hotly contested across America. Given how the topic is presented in respective disciplines and core textbooks, students are often misinformed. Introductory textbooks may be one of the few places where students are exposed to significant discussions on affirmative action. In this study, we examine affirmative action policy in American government introductory textbooks published between 2005 and 2014. Our study is modeled on previous, similar analyses of introductory textbooks. We use content analysis to examine the extent to which affirmative action discussions challenge or reinforce affirmative action myths and meritocracy. We conclude that textbook discussions that emphasize the policy intent over policy interpretation tend to debunk affirmative action myths and meritocracy. Meaning, the policy intent focus-presented as the "equality of opportunity" view-challenges historical discrimination and racism while the policy interpretation focus-presented as the "equality of outcome" view-seems to reinforce negative views.

show abstract