AWARENESS AND UTILIZATION OF GENDER-FAIR

LANGUAGE OF STUDENT LEADERS IN PANGASINAN

STATE UNIVERSITY

By:
Bea Joy M. Lozada
Grace M. Tandoc
Iris May E. Dela Cruz
 OUTLINE
1. Background of the Study
2. Methods
a. Research Design
b. Respondents
c. Research Instrument and Its Validation
3. Summary of Findings
4. Conclusions
5. Recommendations
6. References
 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Language is a form of communication based on

a system of symbols that can be spoken, written or
signaled. Thru the use of language, we can
communicate our thoughts and ideas. the use
language gradually evolved to a more gender
sensitive or gender fair approach of a
communication. It discouraged the use of “sexist”
language in any form of communication.

 
 Gender-neutral language or gender-inclusive
language avoids biases towards a particular sex or
social gender as it aims at reducing gender
stereotyping and discrimination. This theory aims at
analyzing and changing sexual identifications of
writers. Two particular sources of these
misunderstanding are “Man” as genetic form used
in the English language and the ambiguous use of
the pronoun “He”. (Miller and Swift (1988), 11-17.)
 According to Kintanar “Sexism in a language is
the use of language which devalues members of
one sex, and almost invariably women, and thus
fosters gender inequality and it discriminate
women by rendering them in invisible or
trivializing them at the same time that it
perpetuates notion of male supremacy” .
(Kintanar, 1998)
 METHODS

•RESEARCH DESIGN

This study used descriptive research method.

Descriptive research method is devoted to the gathering
of information about prevailing conditions or situations
for the purpose of description and interpretation is not
simply amassing and tabulating facts but includes proper
analyses, interpretation, comparisons, identification of
trends and relationships. (Aggarwal, 2008)
 Random sampling was the method used in
gathering data and in determining the sample
population of respondents and questionnaire was
used as the main instrument of the study.

The Likert rating Scale was applied in

determining the awareness and utilization of
gender-fair language of student leaders in
Pangasinan State University-Lingayen Campus.
• RESPONDENTS
The study conducted in Pangasinan State University-
Lingayen Campus. The respondents of the study are the
student leaders of selected twenty (20) out of the
thirty-one (31) accredited student organizations from
the Student Services Office.

The sample population resulted in calculation using

Sloven Formula (N/1+Ne2) was 200 out of 401 student
leaders from the 20 accredited student organizations.
The 20 accredited student organizations namely:
•Association of Future English Teachers (AFET)
• Math Circle
• Student Association for Extension (SAFE).
• Junior Business Manager’s Association (JBMA)
• Kapisanan ng Mga Magaaral ng Araling Panlipunan
(KMAP)
• Linguists Guild (LG)
• Organization of Future Teachers of Technology and
Livelihood Education (OFTTLE)
• Pangasinan State University-Economic Society (PSU-ES)
• Supreme Student Council (SSC)
• Future Nutrition and Dietetics Club (FNDC)
• Future Restaurateur and Hotelier Club (FRHC),
• Association of Industrial Technology Students (AITS)
• Association of Chess Enthusiasts (ACE)
• Caboloan Performing Arts Guild (CPAG)
• Junior Social Workers Association of the Philippines
(JSWAP)
• Cast Chronicle
• Kapisanan ng Mga Magaaral ng Filipino (KAMFIL)
• CSITS
• Young Public Administrators’ Guild (YPAG)
 The study comprised of four parts prepared by the
researchers as the data gathering instrument. Part 1
contained the profile of the respondents, Part 2 focused
on the level of awareness in the use of gender-fair
language among the student leaders in Pangasinan State
University, Part 3 concerned the utilization of gender-fair
language among the student leaders in Pangasinan State
University, Part 4 concentrated on the problems
encountered by the student leaders in using gender-fair
language in terms of level of awareness and level of
utilization.
 The research instrument used in data gathering
validated through the help of the Adviser, GAD Campus
Coordinator, GAD Deputy Director, and Instructors.
A communication letter was prepared addressed to
the student leaders as the respondents of the study for
the approval to distribute and answer the questionnaire.
Frequency counts and percentage distribution
measured the profile of the respondents; while average
weighted mean was used to determine the level of
awareness, the extent of utilization and the problems
encountered by the student leaders of Pangasinan State
University in using the gender-fair language.
 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
• Profile of the Respondents

On age, 180 (90%) of respondents fall within

the age bracket of 18-20; 17 (8.5%) of
respondents are from the age bracket of 21-23,
while 3 (1.5%) of respondents belonged to the
age bracket of 24-above. Based on gathered
data, majority of the student leaders hold
positions between the ages of 18-20 years old.
 In terms of sex, 107 (53.5%) of respondents are
female; while male respondents obtained 93 (46.5%).
It is apparent that female student leaders have
greater number of respondents in terms of sex.

In year level, majority of respondents are third year

which obtained 110 (55%); fourth year obtained 64
(32%); second year obtained 23(11.5); while the
respondents from first year obtained 3 (1.5%).
 As regards to college, 72 (36%) of respondents
belonged College of Sciences and Letters; 59 (29.5%)
belonged to College of Education; 34 (17%) of
respondents fall within College of Business and
Public Administration; 22 (11%) of respondents are
from College of Computing Science; 12 (6%) are
from College of Hospitality Management; while 1
(0.5%) of respondent from the College of
Technology.
 In terms of number of times
elected/appointed as a student leader, 2
obtained 72 (36%) of respondents; 1 gained 59
(30%) of respondents; 3 gathered 34 (17%); 5
gathered 22 (11%) of respondents; 4 obtained 12
(6%) of respondents; while 6 gained 1 (.05) of
respondent.
• Level of Awareness in the Use
of Gender-Fair Language

Student leaders are generally often aware in the use

of gender-fair language along school activities, seminars
and social media having the overall average weighted
mean of 3.68, 4.07, 3.91 respectively. Particularly, it shows
that student leaders often attend events in relation to
gender-fair language, they always received copies of
reading materials and engaged themselves in discussions
about gender-fair language , and always active in posting
and sharing post/blog about gender-fair language.
• Extent of Utilization in the Use

of Gender-Fair Language
Based on results, student leaders often utilize the
use of gender-fair language in terms of writing papers
and publications and in delivering presentations with
an overall average weighted mean of 3.56 and 4.08
respectively. Particularly, it shows that student leaders
always observed proper use designation of
officials/officers when addressing people, and often
manage to boost gender identification when
delivering presentation
• Problems Encountered in Using
Gender-Fair Language
In using gender-fair language, student leaders often
encountered problems in the level of awareness and
extent of utilization with overall average weighted mean
of 3.62 and 3.76 respectively. Particularly, they often
encountered problems in the development concept in
achieving gender-bias free language that is not for all
and always encountered the failure to consider the
sexual orientation of the audience when delivering
presentation
 CONCLUSIONS

1. The study comprised of two hundred total number of

respondents. Females placed the largest population
in terms of sex, and majority of them are in the ages
of 18 to 20 years old. Furthermore, the majority are
enrolled in third year level and from the College of
Science and Letters. Based on the results, majority of
them are elected/appointed twice.
2. In the level of awareness in the use of gender-fair-
language, it is apparent that student leaders are
aware in the implementation of gender-fair
language. Along the dimension of school activities,
seminars and social media, it develops the student
leaders’ awareness with the help of the conducted
activities, reading materials, and other provided
services related to gender-fair language.
3. In the level of utilization in the use of gender-fair
language, it is apparent that student leaders
utilized gender-fair language in writing papers
and publications and in delivering presentations.
With the reading materials provided and
activities conducted, the student leaders are
effective in using gender-fair words in their
writings and they manage to promote
gender sensitivity and equality.
4. Also, the extent of utilization of gender-fair language
in terms of delivering presentations shows that
student leaders utilized to boost gender
identification when delivering presentation and also
they addressed people with gender sensitivity and
equality.
5. In the problems encountered, majority of respondents
exhibited concerns on the proper dissemination of
development concept of gender-fair language and
the sexual orientation of the audience most of the
time is not considered.
 RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Gender sensitivity website or page shall be

established inside the Campus;
2. Publication of reading materials which shall be
made available to all;
3. Conduct seminars and training workshops on
gender-fair language in the Institution which shall
be open to all;
4. Official use of gender-fair language in all
documents, letters, and printed materials;
5. Posting of rules, policies and guidelines in
conspicuous places in school premises;
6. Conduct activities concerning language like poetry,
essay writing and others using gender-fair language;
7. Hold gender-fair writing contests;
8. Form gender awareness groups in the Institution
which will be accessible to all interested people; and
9. Make a follow-up study that is wider in scope.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
•Books

Kintanar, T. (1998). Gender Fair-Language A Primer. University Center for Women’s

Studies: University of the Philippines. pp.5, 25-30.
Sta.Maria, A. et.al. (2007). Training Manual on Gender Sensitivity and CEDAW. Ateneo
Human Rights Center: Makati City. pp.8-10.
Sczesny, S. (2016). Can Gender-Fair Language Reduce Gender Stereotyping and
Discrimination?.Department of Psychology: University of Bern-Bern Switzerland. pp.1-2.
Santos, M. et. al. (2015). Gender-Fair Language Source Book. Gender and
Development PangasinSta.Mariaan State University: Pangasinan State University. p.3.
Gruzd, A. et al. (2013). Wired Academia: Why Social Science Scholars Are Social
Media. Proceedings of the 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
pp. 36-37.
Coates, J. Women, Men and Language..Routledge New York. ISBN: 75836055642. pp. 5-7.
Shariatmadari, D. (2016). Eight Words that Reveal the Sexism at the Heart of the English
Language. pp. 1-5.
•Journals
Salaria, N. “Meaning of the Term-Descriptive Survey Research Method”. International Journal
of Transformations in Business Management, Vol. No.1 ISSN: 2231-6868. Apr- Jun 2012.
Fernandez, M. “Gender Sensitivity in the Court System”. Review of Women’s Studies. Vol.12. No
1-2. ISSN0117-9489.
Thongsame, A. “Gender Equality in Asean: Lesson From The Philippines And The Road Ahead”.
Warwick ASEAN Conference. Jan 31, 2016.
Fowler, H.W “Gender-Neutral Language or gender inclusive language”.Fowler’s Dictionary of
Modern English Usage. Oct 10, 2014.
Gastil, J. “Generic Pronouns and Sexist Language: The Oxymoromic Character of Masculine
Generics”. Strunk and White the Element of Style. Vol. 23. 1990.
Bernhard, M. “Students Indicate Preferred Gender Pronouns at Registration”. Crimson Staff
Writter. Sept 2, 2015.
Steinmetz, K. “Down the Manhole: State Officials Grapple with Gender Neutral Language”.
Time Inc. Feb 5, 2013.
Witt, S. “Parental Influence on Children’s Socialization to Gender Roles”. Akron Ohio. Vol. 32.
ISSN: 126. 1997
Nicholas, J. “The Tweets that Killed a University: A Case Study Investigating the use of
Traditional and Social Media in the Closure of a State University”.Computers in Human
Behavior. Vol 29. No.6. November 2013.
.
Ayers, E. “Does Digital Scholarship Have a Future?”.EducauseReview. Vol. 48. July/August 2013.
Fernandez, M. “Gender Sensitivity in the Court System”. Review of Women’s Studies. Vol.12. No 1-2.
ISSN 0117-9489.
Guazon , V. et al.“Use of Gender-Fair Language”. Supreme Court of the Philippines

A.M. No. RTJ-07-2038.2007.

”APA Guidelines for Non-Sexist Use of Language”. Vol. 59, Number 3.
Valledor-Lukey, V. “Papgkababae at Pagkalalaki (Feminityand Masculinity) Developing a Filipino
gender Trait Inventory and Predicting Self-esteem and Sexism”.
Prewitt-Freilino, J.“The Gendering of Language: A Comparison of Gender Equality in Countries
with Gendered, Natural Gender, and Genderless Languages. Volume 66, Issue 3–4.
February 2012
Guimei He. “An Analysis of Sexism in English”. Journal of Language Teaching and Research. Vol.
1, No. 3. ISSN 1798-4769. May 2010
•Unpublished Materials/Thesis
Vervecken. (2012). The Impact of Gender-Fair Language Use on Children’s Gendered
Occupational Beliefs and Listeners’ Perceptions of Speakers.Freie University at
Berlin.Doctoral Research.
Elisa Merkel. (2013). The Two Faces of Gender-Fair Language. UniversitaDegliStudi Di Padova:
Doctoral Research.
Ruby Ann Ayo. (2016). Integrating Gender-Fair Education in the Teaching of Philippine History.
Bicol University: Undergraduate Research.
Blackless, M. et al. (2000) How sexually dimorphic are we? Review and synthesis. American
Journal of Human Biology .
Ruth, E. (2016). Mariama Ba’s “So Long a Letter”: An Analysis on Language of Feminism.
Pangasinan State University: Undergraduate Research.
SeemaJayachandran. (2014). The Roots of Gender Inequality in Developing Countries.
Northwestern University.
Kim Smith. A&T Students Cover the DNC. Department of Journalism and Communication.
North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University.
Na Pattalung. (2008). An Analysis of Sexist Language in ESL textbooks by Thai Authors used in
Thailand. University of North Texas
Yale. (2016). A Guide to Gender Identity and Affirmation in the Workplace. Yale University.
Graham Peebles. (2014). Gender and caste discrimination in India. South Asia
Highlights.
•Internet References
“Gender Neutral in European Parliament”.www.europarl.eu. Jan 5, 2016.
“Magna Carta of Women”.Philippine Commission on Women. www.pcw.gov.ph. March 15, 2010.
“Establishing the Policies and Guidelines on Gender and Development in the Commission on
Higher Education Institutions”.www.ched.com. Memorandum order no. 1 Series of 2015.
“Global Gender Gap”. Wikigender. www.wikigender.org. Oct 25, 2016.
“Sweden’s New Gender-Neutral Pronoun: Hen”. What women really think. www.slate.com. Apr 11,
2012.
“The person who fought to change her name”. Newsday. www.newsday.com. Feb 17, 2012.
“Csc Mc 12, S. 2005: Use of Non-Sexist Language in All Official Documents, Communications,
and Issuances”, Civil Service Commission.www.csguide.org. March 30, 2005.
“Guidelines on Gender-Neutral Language”. UNESCO.http://unesdoc.unesco.org. Mar 6, 1998.
“Gender and Development Program”. sbma.com. August 2009.
“Gender Equality”. United Nations DevelopmentProgramme. http://www.undp.org
“Gender Fair Education”. Miriam College. www.mc.edu.ph. July 28, 2015.
“Greek Philosophy on the Inferiority of Women”. www.comenpriests.org.
“The LSA Guidelines for Nonsexist Usage”. www.linguistsociety.org. Dec 1996.
“Avoiding Sexist Language”. www.hamilton.edu. 1993.
“What happened? In Interview, Hillary Clinton gives sexist argument for why she lost
the election”. www.newsneek.com. Sept 13, 2017.
“American Dialect Society”.www.americandialect.org.2015.
“Towards Communication Free of Gender Bias”.www.adl.org. March 1, 2016.
“Watch your (Gender) Tone”. www.textio.com.Jul. 18, 2017.
“Women and Gender Institute –Gender Fair Education”.www.mc.edu.ph.
“A Comparison of the Arguments Surrounding Gender-Neutral Language”. Cari
Westbrook.lindyaffair.wordpress.com. Jul 30, 2015.
“7 Common Pinoy Phrases You Probably Didn’t Notice Were Exist”. theboringliar.wordpress.com.
Jan 17,2018.
“Social Media as a Primary Source: A Coming Age.https://er.educause,edu/articles. .
Dec 6,2013.
Questions?
Thank you!