Okay...as is the case predictably with documents from departments of education, which seem most often to be dreamed up by people who either can't think or can't write, or both, this makes about as much sense as 5+4=3, which is also okay in politically correct postmodern math education. Exactly what is a gender stereotype? The experts didn't define it, so if it exists it's what anyone says it is.
Stereotype is defined as “something conforming to a fixed or general pattern.” So one should look for examples in the media that reinforce gender conforming to a fixed or general pattern. Would an NFL linebacker, whose agreed-by-everybody's job description (fixed and general pattern) is to give a concussion to the opposing quarterback, qualify? If so, it should be called out and interrogated but only if in the presence of others. However, an “it” can't be interrogated because only people can be interrogated, unless the politically correct folks think a cardboard box is intelligent enough to hold a conversation.
If, however, the linebacker should be the object of interrogation, what would be the questions he should answer? Does he feel he is male or female? No, that won't do because it implies more than one gender, a politically incorrect taboo, and might even invite a chop to the molars. Would he rather shower with his teammates or the cheerleaders, recognizing that there's no such thing as gender? No, that won't do because the linebacker might laugh so hard he would herniate himself and go on the disabled list, though that has the advantage of giving complete attention while on the bench to the cheerleaders instead of watching a boring game in which he is not part of the on-field mayhem.
Would a Miss America contestant be a proper person to be called out and interrogated? She can't be asked if she considers herself neither male nor female, though she might come up with transgender, which seems to be the most popular form of gender/non-gender these days. Perhaps that's the answer the education folks are aiming at, to wit, that everyone is in the process of becoming one gender or another; however, that won't do because the ugly matter of gender-difference rears its evil head. If everyone got caught in the middle of making that determination, what kind of sex, if any, would be in order, and what label would be put on that condition, since it can't be called gender, which is nonexistent to the education folks? We're getting there...be patient.
Binary is defined as “compounded or consisting of or marked by two things or parts.” So, the suggestion becomes “Look for examples in the media that reinforce...compounded or consisting of or marked by two things or parts models of gender.” This is educationese at its most mysterious. It actually calls for a model of gender consisting of two things or parts. So, gender has now been split into two parts instead of gender being eradicated altogether (no such things as boys and girls). It's easy to see where this is going.
Gender is here to stay, notwithstanding the efforts of sophisticated intellectuals in the Nebraska education system to eliminate it. In their effort, they have actually established two male-genders and two female-genders, the original genders being split by their own definition/admonition to get rid of gender. Binary is what binary is. The fact of the matter, of course, is that the intellectuals are so intelligent that they can't write the English language so anything makes sense. No one can figure out this linguistic flimflam to get rid of gender-identification but can identify what's been the objective all along, to wit, UNISEX. This means the same school-toilets for everyone. Hurray...and don't leave the lid up! Egad!
Is it any wonder the U.S. lags behind other nations in overall education?
And so it goes.