SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 58 Sayı: 3

Constructing Gender Identities in Peer Groups in an EFL Classroom

Bir İngilizce Sınıfında Akran Gruplarında Toplumsal Cinsiyet Kimliklerinin Kurulumu

Asuman Fulya Soğuksu(ANKARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM BİLİMLERİ FAKÜLTESİ, EĞİTİM PROGRAMLARI VE ÖĞRETİM (DR))0000-0003-4528-533X
Fatma Bıkmaz(Türk Eğitim Derneği)0000-0001-7880-3231
Pages
1345–1398
Publication Date
2025-12-15
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These findings have implications for English language learning processes, as well as for future research.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines how girls and boys construct gender identities within peer groups in the context of English learning experiences in an EFL classroom.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Drawing on a critical ethnographic approach, the research was conducted with 34 tenth-grade students and their English teacher at a public high school.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These findings have implications for English language learning processes, as well as for future research.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Yabancı dil olarak İngilizce · akran grupları · toplumsal cinsiyet

Abstract

This study examines how girls and boys construct gender identities within peer groups in the context of English learning experiences in an EFL classroom. Drawing on a critical ethnographic approach, the research was conducted with 34 tenth-grade students and their English teacher at a public high school. Ethnographic data were generated through participant observation and interviews. The data analysis, informed by Foucault's concept of “games of truth,” reveals the multiple constructions of gender within friendship groups, how class mediates gendered norms, intergroup power relations, and the dominant masculinity performed by the popular boys. The findings also show that alternative gender performances are marginalized and that disciplinary gender norms are reproduced in the classroom. Additionally, the study demonstrates that, for certain students, immunity from regulatory mechanisms and inclusion in group dynamics without exclusion are possible. These findings have implications for English language learning processes, as well as for future research.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, kız ve erkek öğrencilerin akran gruplarında toplumsal cinsiyet kimliklerini nasıl kurduklarını sınıf içi İngilizce öğrenme yaşantıları bağlamında incelemektir. Eleştirel etnografik yaklaşıma dayandırılan araştırma, bir devlet okulunda bir onuncu sınıftaki 34 öğrenci ve sınıfın İngilizce öğretmeni ile yürütülmüştür. Katılımcı gözlem ve görüşmeler yoluyla etnografik veri üretimi sağlanmıştır. Verilerin Foucault’nun “doğruluk oyunları” kavramına dayalı biçimde çözümlenmesiyle ulaşılan bulgular; toplumsal cinsiyetin akran gruplarında çoklu biçimde kurulumunu, sosyal sınıfla kesişimselliği, gruplar arası iktidar mücadelelerini ve popüler erkek grubunun baskın erkeklik performansını ortaya koymaktadır. Bulgular, sınıfta alternatif toplumsal cinsiyet performanslarının dışlandığını ve disiplin edici toplumsal cinsiyet kurgularının yeniden üretildiğini de göstermektedir. Bunların yanında, çalışmada bazı öğrenciler için düzenleyici mekanizmalara karşı dokunulmazlığın ve grup dinamiklerine dışlanmadan katılımın olanaklı olduğu görülmektedir. Bu belirlemeler, İngilizce öğrenme süreçleri ve gelecek araştırmalar için birtakım çıkarımlarda bulunmayı olanaklı kılmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Soğuksu, A. F., Bıkmaz, F. (2025). Constructing Gender Identities in Peer Groups in an EFL Classroom. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 58 Sayı: 3, 1345–1398. https://doi.org/10.30964/auebfd.1726607

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (53)

  1. Arıkan, A. (2005). Age, gender and social class in ELT coursebooks: A critical study. Hacettepe University Journal of Educational Sciences, 28, 29-38. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/hunefd/issue/7808/102417
  2. Aslan, O. (2009). The role of gender and language learning strategies in learning English (Thesis No. 250767) [Master’s thesis, Middle East Technical University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/TezGoster?key=NtBAevXNhYaNqJFoAcdBdtjbqqS9TsxUKnZiQ0JctRk5tqln1smvdVolQ5M7jcns
  3. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge. Cameron, D. (2005). Language, gender and sexuality: Current issues and new directions. Applied Linguistics, 26(4), 482-502. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami027
  4. Cameron, D. (2010). Sex/Gender, Language and the New Biologism. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 173-192. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp022
  5. Carspecken, P. F. (1996). Critical ethnography in educational research: A theoretical and practical guide. Routledge.
  6. Connell, R. W. (1989). Cool guys, swots and wimps: The interplay of masculinity and education. Oxford Review of Education, 15(3), 291-301. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1050420
  7. Connell, R.W. (2005). Masculinities (2nd ed.). Routledge.
  8. Delamont, S. (2007). Ethnography and participant observation. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. F. Gubrium & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 205-217). Sage.
  9. Egemen, F. (2017). Gender representations in the EFL course book Yes You Can A2.1 (Thesis No. 454390) [Master’s thesis, Çukurova University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/TezGoster?key=DPTyuy3wRPq_qvCPSqUB673c6LA-7dcpZDbI30t1qV6_tiahFMGgdsWI0vZwi64d
  10. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. Basic Books.
  11. Goldstein, T. (1997). Language research methods and critical pedagogy. In N. H. Hornberger & D. Corson (Eds.), Encyclopaedia of language and Education, Volume 8 (pp. 67-77). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  12. Heller, M. (2001). Gender and public space in a bilingual school. In A. Pavlenko, A. Blackledge, I. Piller, & M. Teutsch-Dwyer (Eds.), Multilingualism, Second Language Learning, and Gender (pp. 257-282). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  13. Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice (3rd ed.). Routledge.
  14. Johannessen, E. M. V. (2021). Blurred lines: The ambiguity of disparaging humour and slurs in Norwegian high school boys’ friendship groups. Young, 29(5), 475-489. https://doi.org/10.1177/11033088211006924
  15. Julé, A. (2004). Gender, participation and silence in the language classroom: Sh- shushing the girls. Palgrave Macmillan.
  16. Kehily, M. J., & Nayak, A. (1997). ‘Lads and laughter’: Humour and the production of heterosexual hierarchies. Gender and Education, 9(1), 69-88. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540259721466
  17. Kenway, J., & Fitzclarence, L. (1997). Masculinity, violence and schooling: Challenging poisonous pedagogies. Gender and Education, 9(1), 117-133. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540259721493
  18. Lather, P. (1986). Research as praxis. Harvard Educational Review, 56(3), 257-277. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.56.3.bj2h231877069482
  19. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage.
  20. Mac an Ghaill, M. (1994). The making of men: Masculinities, sexualities and schooling. Open University Press.
  21. Mahony, P. (1985). Schools for the boys? Co-education reassessed. Hutchinson.
  22. Martino, W. (1999). ‘Cool boys’, ‘party animals’, ‘squids’ and ‘poofters’: Interrogating the dynamics and politics of adolescent masculinities in school. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(2), 239-263. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425699995434
  23. Martino, W. (2000). Policing masculinities: Investigating the role of homophobia and heteronormativity in the lives of adolescent school boys. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 8(2), 213-236. https://doi.org/10.3149/jms.0802.213
  24. Menzies, F. G., & Santoro, N. (2017). ‘Doing’ gender in a rural Scottish secondary school: An ethnographic study of classroom interactions. Ethnography and Education, 13(4): 428-441. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2017.1351386
  25. Norton, B., & Pavlenko, A. (2004). Gender and English language learners: Challenges and possibilities. In B. Norton & A. Pavlenko (Eds.), Gender and English language learners (pp. 1-14). TESOL.
  26. Odenbring, Y., & Johansson, T. (2021). Just a joke? The thin line between teasing, harassment and violence among teenage boys in lower secondary school. Journal of Men’s Studies, 29(2), 177-193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1060826520934771
  27. Öztürk, G., & Gürbüz, N. (2013). The impact of gender on foreign language speaking anxiety and motivation. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 654-665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.106
  28. Pavlenko, A., & Piller, I. (2008). Language education and gender. In S. May & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education vol. 1: Language policy and political issues in education (pp. 57-69). Springer.
  29. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research and evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage.
  30. Paechter, C., & Clark, S. (2007). Learning gender in primary school playgrounds: Findings from the Tomboy identities study. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 15(3), 317-331. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681360701602224
  31. Peltola, M., & Phoenix, A. (2022). Nuancing young masculinities: Helsinki boys’ intersectional relationships in new times. Helsinki University Press.
  32. Pennycook, A. (2021). Critical applied linguistics: A critical introduction. Routledge.
  33. Pennycook, A. (2022). Critical applied linguistics in the 2020s. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 19(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427587.2022.2030232
  34. Punj, G., & Steward, D. W. (1983). Cluster analysis in marketing research: Review and suggestions for application. Journal of Marketing Research, 20(2), 134-148. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378302000204
  35. Reay, D. (2001). ‘Spice girls’, ‘nice girls’, ‘girlies’, and ‘tomboys’: Gender discourses, girls’ cultures and femininities in the primary classroom. Gender and Education, 13(2), 153-166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09540250120051178
  36. Renold, E. (2001). Learning the ‘hard’ way: Boys, hegemonic masculinity and the negotiation of learner identities in the primary school. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 22(3), 369-385. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425690120067980
  37. Renold, E. (2006). ‘They wont let us play. unless you’re going out with one of them’: Girls, boys and Butlers ‘heterosexual matrix’ in the primary years. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 27(4), 489-509. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425690600803111
  38. Renold, E. (2008). Queer masculinity: Re-theorising contemporary tomboyism in the schizoid space of innocent/ heterosexualized young femininities. Girlhood Studies, 1(2), 129-151. https://doi.org/10.3167/ghs.2008.010208
  39. Rowlett, B., & King, B. W. (2017). Language Education, gender, and sexuality. In T. L. McCarty & S. May (Eds.), Encyclopaedia of language and education: Language policy and political issues in education (pp. 85-97). Springer International Publishing.
  40. Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.
  41. Selvi, A. F., & Kocaman, C. (2020). (Mis-/under-)representations of gender and sexuality in locally-produced ELT materials. Journal of Language, Identity & Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2020.1726757
  42. Skelton, C. (1997). Primary Boys and Hegemonic Masculinities. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 18(3), 349-369. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142569970180303
  43. Smith, J. (2007). ‘Ye’ve got to ‘ave balls to play this game sir!’ Boys, peers and fears: The negative influence of school-based ‘cultural accomplices’ in constructing hegemonic masculinities. Gender and Education, 19(2), 179-198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09540250601165995
  44. Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
  45. Sunderland, J. (2004). Gendered discourses. Palgrave Macmillan.
  46. Swain, J. (2003). How young schoolboys become somebody: The role of the body in the construction of masculinity. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 24(3), 299-314. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425690301890
  47. Swain, J. (2025). Negotiating gender identities in primary school: Children’s lives with their peers. Palgrave Macmillan.
  48. Tutar, J. A. (2008). A comparative study of gender representation in English teaching coursebooks in the 1970s and the 2000s (Thesis No. 231413) [Master’s thesis, Hacettepe University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/TezGoster?key=UPP_Zu9isEmWGFXFCBYasVeezzK-bJUCDt4xr5JUNGsndxeJCYP5vQb4DnyEgvIv
  49. Walkerdine, V. (1990). Schoolgirl fictions. Verso.
  50. Warrington, M., & Younger, M. (2011). ‘Life is a tightrope’: Reflections on peer group inclusion and exclusion amongst adolescent girls and boys. Gender and Education, 23(2), 153-168. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540251003674121
  51. Willis, P. (1977). Learning to labour: How working class kids get working class jobs. Saxon House.
  52. Kenway, J., & Fitzclarence, L. (1997). Masculinity, violence and schooling: Challenging poisonous pedagogies. Gender and Education, 9(1), 117-133. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540259721493
  53. Renold, E. (2006). ‘They wont let us play. unless you’re going out with one of them’: Girls, boys and Butlers ‘heterosexual matrix’ in the primary years. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 27(4), 489-509. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425690600803111