The main objective of this study is to examine and reveal images of gender-stereotyped occupations from primary school English textbooks and uncover gendered attributes from these images. Images in the textbooks are investigated based on how representational meanings reveal agentic and communal qualities. Images were analysed through identifying patterns and relationships of images to attributes from Social Role Theory. Stereotyped images were identified through links and associations from Atlas.ti software that connected images with characteristics and meanings. This study found 126 images represented in professional occupations and 81 images represented in non-professional occupations. Results showed that occupational images of males were linked to more self-assertive and agentic qualities while females were portrayed with more caring, communal qualities. Social semiotic analysis revealed that more males were shown as professionals such as architects, and doctors whereas females are more portrayed with professional occupations such as nurses and teachers, and non-professional males were also included with agentic qualities, portrayed by farmers and firefighters. This study asserts that a more gender-equitable solution would be to give children a wider range of portrayals of men and women in order to communicate gender norms to children. Parents, caretakers, teachers and schools also have responsibilities towards boys and girls in that they ensure learning happens in an environment that they do not give out messages, subliminal or otherwise that there are subjects that are only particular to boys and only particular to girls. Apart from teachers, this is particularly true also for parents, family members and caretakers where they may be directly influencing children who are in their care towards gender stereotypical subject choice all throughout the children’s schooling life in the home environment. Furthermore, parents, teachers and schools must cooperate together to encourage boys and girls at an early age to be interested in non-stereotypical options in subject choice.

Keywords: gender roles; occupations; agentic; communal; textbooks; socio-semiotics; social role theory

Aauw), A. a. O. U. W. (2009). How Schools Shortchange Girls: Three Perspectives on Curriculum. In Flinders, D. J. & Thornton, S. J. (Eds.). Third. The Curriculum Studies Reader (pp. 214 - 236). Routledge.

Aauw Educational Foundation. (1995.) How Schools Shortchange Girls - the Aauw Report. Wellesley College Center for Research on Women.

Ansary, H. & Babaii, E. (2003). Subliminal Sexism in Current ESL/EFL Textbooks. Asian EFL Journal. Vol. 5(1), 1-15.

AAUW Educational Foundation. (1995). How Schools Shortchange Girls-

The AAUW Report. Wellesley College Center for Research on Women.

Azah, A. (2009). Rupa Dan Gaya Busana Melayu. Bangi: Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Bahiyah, A. H., Mohd. Subakir, M. Y., Kesumawati, A. B., Yuen, C. K. &

Azhar, J. (2008). Linguistic Sexism and Gender Role Stereotyping in Malaysian English Language Textbooks. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies. Vol. 8(2), 45 - 77.

Barthes, R. (1977). Image, Music, Text. London: Fontana Press.

Bezemer, J. & Kress, G. (2009). Visualizing English: A Social Semiotic History of a School Subject. Visual Communication. Vol. 8(1), 247-263.

Butler, J. (2004). Undoing Gender. New York and London: Routledge.

Cejka, M. A. & Eagly, A. H. (1999). Gender-Stereotypic Images of Occupations Correspond to the Sex Segregation of Employment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Vol. 25(4), 413-423.

Chairozila, M. S. (2016). Gender Stereotyped Images of Occupations in Malaysian Primary English Textbooks: A Social Semiotic Approach. Unpublished PhD Thesis. The School of Language and Linguistics, Faculty Of Social Sciences and Humanities, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,

Diekman, A. B. & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as Dynamic Constructs: Women and Men of the Past, Present, and Future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Vol. 26(10), 1171-1188.

Diekman, A. B. & Murnen, S. K. (2004). Learning to Be Little Women and Little Men: The Inequitable Gender Equality of Nonsexist Children's Literature. Sex Roles. Vol. 50(5/6), 373-385.

Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Social-Role Interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Eagly, A. H. & Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender Stereotypes Stem from the Distribution of Women and Men into Social Roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 46(4), 735-754.

Eagly, A. H., Wood, W. & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social Role Theory of Sex Differences and Similarities: A Current Appraisal. In Eckes, T. &

Trautner, H. M. (Ed.). The Developmental Social Psychology of Gender (pp. 123-174). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Emilia, E., Moecharam, N. Y. & Syifa, I. L. (2017). Gender in EFL Classroom: Transitivity Analysis in English Textbook for Indonesian Students. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics. Vol. 7(1), 206-214.

Epstein, C. F. (2010). A Theory of Female Subordination. In Lorber, J. (Ed.). Gender Inequality: Feminist Theory and Politics (pp. 25-35). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, Ltd.

Guijarro, J. M. & Pinarsanz, M. J. (2008). Compositional, Interpersonal and Representational Meanings in a Children’s Narrrative: A Multimodal Discourse Analysis. Journal of Pragmatics. Vol. 40(1), 1601-1619.

Halliday, M. a. K. (1975). Learning How to Mean: Explorations in the Development of Language. London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. a. K. (1978). Language as Social Semiotic. London: Edward Arnold Ltd.

Halliday, M. a. K. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2002). Construing Experience through Meaning. New York: Continuum.

Halliday, M. a. K. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd. London: Hodder Arnold.

Harrison, C. (2003). Visual Social Semiotics: Understanding How Still Images Make Meaning. Technical Communication. Vol. 50(1), 46 - 60.

Jewitt, C. & Oyama, R. (2001). Visual Meaning: A Social Semiotic Approach. In van Leeuwen, T. J. & Jewitt, C. (Es.). Handbook of Visual

Analysis (pp. 134-156). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Kress, G. (2001). Sociolinguistics and Social Semiotics. In Cobley, P. (Ed.). The Routledge Companion to Semiotics and Linguistics (pp. 66-82). London: Routledge.

Kress, G. (2005). Gains and Losses: New Forms of Texts, Knowledge and Learning. Computers and Composition. Vol. 22(1), 5-22.

Kress, G. (2009). What Is Mode? In. Jewitt, C. (Ed.). The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis (pp. 54-67). London: Routledge.

Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. Great Britain: Routledge.

Kress, G. & van Leeuwen, T. J. (1996). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London & New York: Routledge.

Kress, G. & van Leeuwen, T. J. (2001). Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication. Great Britain: Arnold.

Kress, G. & van Leeuwen, T. F. (2006). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London/New York: Routledge.

Luyt, B., Seng, S. L. & Ng, Y. Y. (2017). Gender Representations and Stereotypes in Singaporean Picture Books: 1970 to 2008. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science. Vol. 16(3), 49-65.

Maccoby, E. E. & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The Psychology of Sex Differences. Standford, C. A.: Standford University Press.

Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994.) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. USA: Sage Publications Inc.

Mohamad Subakir, M. Y., Bahiyah, A. H., Yuen, C. K., Zarina, O. & Azhar, J. (2012). Linguistic Sexism in Qatari Primary Mathematics Textbooks. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies. Vol. 12(1), 53-68.

Mohd Faeiz Ikram, M. J., Yasin, M. S. M., Hamid, B. A., Keong, Y. C., Othman, Z. & Jaludin, A. (2011). Verbs and Gender: The Hidden Agenda of a Multicultural Society. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English

Language Studies. Vol. 17, 61-73.

O'Toole, M. (2011). The Language of Displayed Art. 2nd. London and New York: Routledge.

Shinar, E. H. (1975). Sexual Stereotypes of Occupations. Journal of Vocational Behavior. Vol. 7(1), 99-111.

Van Leeuwen, T. J. (2005). Introducing Social Semiotics. New York: Routledge.

Van Leeuwen, T. J. & Kress, G. (2011). Discourse Semiotics. In van Dijk, T. (Ed.). Discourse Studies (pp. 107-125). London: Sage Publications.

Weitzman, E. A. & Miles, M. B. (1995). Computer Programs for Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, Cal.: SAGE Publications.

Wharton, A. S. (2012). The Sociology of Gender: An Introduction to Theory and Research. 2nd. UK: Wiley-Blackwell.