Abstract

Textbooks function as an important resource for teaching and learning of mathematics at the school level across the world. At least at the primary grades the contents of textbooks are situated in the larger society around the learners, in order that the learners can relate to what is taught to them. This opens the possibility for textbooks to uncritically reinforce the prevailing stereotypes or use the opportunity textbook provide to creatively break the stereotypes. Mathematics education research has engaged with the question of gender stereotypes in mathematics textbooks which has had an impact how gender figures in textbooks. However, gender is neither a binary nor monolithic. In the Indian context, gender is not the only social hierarchy that operates. The National Curriculum Framework 2005(hence forth referred to as NCF 2005) addresses the question of prevailing stereotypes about children from social margins and says care must be taken to ensure that the curriculum, textbooks and classroom interaction do not reinforce the stereotypes. Moreover, in the last two decades transgender people have been able to demand recognition and acceptance at least in the higher educational spaces as transgender people. Given these, it would be important to understand how textbooks reflect the changes and demands. This paper analyses the content of the mathematics textbooks developed by the State Council of Education Research and Training (SCERT) of one Indian state, namely Kerala, to understand how they represent gender, caste, class and religious differences and to investigate if the textbooks are inclusive of the disabled learners. Based on the content analysis of the textbooks the paper argues that even as the textbooks try to ensure representation of both girls and boys in the pictures and word problems and make an attempt to be inclusive of different religions and marginalised cultures ( for example by incorporating the picture of Theyyam, which uses an art form of the marginalised people in Kerala) in a textbook, they end up strengthening the existing gender, class, religious stereotypes. It also draws attention to the complete absence of disabled children in the textbooks.