School as a Gender Socialisation Agent: Reinforcing and Resisting Stereotypes

From the moment a child walks into a classroom, school begins shaping not just what they know but who they are expected to be. Beyond textbooks and timetables, schools are powerful spaces where ideas about masculinity and femininity are quietly transmitted – through which subjects are encouraged for whom, who gets called on more often, who is praised for being “well-behaved,” and who is expected to “lead.” This makes the school one of the most influential agents of gender socialisation, second perhaps only to the family. The good news is that schools can also become sites where these very stereotypes are challenged and dismantled.

How schools become gender socialisation agents 🔗

Gender socialisation is the process through which individuals learn the roles, behaviours, and identities considered appropriate for boys and girls in a particular society. Schools transmit these expectations through two channels: the formal curriculum (subjects, syllabus, textbooks) and the hidden curriculum – the unwritten rules, routines, and interactions that quietly teach children “how to be” a girl or a boy. As researchers note, the hidden curriculum is enforced through regular patterns of behaviour and attitude that perpetuate stereotypes about masculinity and femininity.

Think of small, everyday moments: girls assigned to lead the morning assembly choir while boys are picked for the cricket team, classroom monitors chosen along gendered lines, or science labs where boys instinctively grab the equipment first. None of this is written into any rulebook, yet it teaches children clear lessons about who belongs where.

The hidden curriculum at work 🔗

Spatial arrangements, disciplinary practices, and co-curricular activities often follow gendered patterns that students absorb without question. A recent study of educational institutions noted that spatial arrangements separate boys and girls, participation and disciplinary strategies differ by gender, and co-curricular activities are coded in masculine and feminine directions. These patterns feel “natural” because they are repeated and rarely interrupted – which is exactly what makes them so effective at reinforcing stereotypes.

Gender bias in classroom interactions 🔗

Teachers are not villains in this story – they are products of the same society they teach in. Yet research consistently shows that even well-meaning educators carry implicit biases that shape how they interact with students. UNESCO’s 2020 Global Education Monitoring Report highlights that teacher practice is shaped by assumptions and stereotypes about gender, which then directly affect students’ beliefs and learning.

One particularly striking finding: in Italy, girls assigned to teachers with implicit gender bias underperformed in mathematics and chose less demanding secondary schools, often because they followed their teachers’ recommendations. The classroom is not a neutral space – it is a place where adult beliefs become children’s destinies.

The attention gap 🔗

Studies across countries reveal a consistent pattern called the “attention gap.” Boys tend to receive more teacher attention – both positive and negative – while girls are often praised for being quiet, neat, and obedient. Research has documented that boys are more likely to be called on by teachers and receive more attention for both positive and negative behaviours, and that this attention gap correlates with lower mathematics scores for girls.

In Indian classrooms, this often plays out subtly. Boys are told they “have a knack” for maths and science, while girls are nudged towards languages and the arts. A teacher saying “let the boys help carry the chairs” or “girls, please decorate the bulletin board” may seem harmless – but repeated over twelve years of schooling, it builds an entire architecture of expectation.

Disciplinary differences 🔗

Boys are also more likely to be labelled as “disruptive” or “inattentive,” which can lead to harsher discipline. A study in China cited by UNESCO found that female teachers rated boys as more disruptive and inattentive in class than girls. This labelling has long-term consequences: boys who are repeatedly told they are “naughty” may begin to live up to that identity, while girls who are praised for being “well-behaved” may suppress questions, curiosity, and confidence.

Curriculum and textbooks: lessons beyond the lesson 🔗

Textbooks are perhaps the most visible carriers of gender messages because every student opens them every day. What they show – and what they hide – shapes children’s sense of who counts and who matters. And here, the evidence about Indian textbooks is sobering.

A detailed analysis by the Center for Global Development found that just 34 percent of gendered words (such as “he” or “she”) in NCERT books are female, while 66 percent are male. The same researchers concluded that South Asia, and India in particular, is the worst region in the English-speaking world for gender stereotypes and low representation of women and girls in schoolbooks.

Stereotyped roles in images and stories 🔗

The bias is not just numerical – it is qualitative. Textbooks repeatedly link mothers with cooking, assume doctors are male, and depict men as breadwinners while women are confined to domestic settings. An analysis of NCERT books published between 2020 and 2022 found that words related to achievement and work carry a male bias, while words related to appearance carry a female bias. State board textbooks were often found to be even more stereotyped than NCERT ones.

A widely-discussed Class 5 NCERT illustration once depicted only men constructing a house – completely erasing the women who, in reality, carry bricks and cement on every Indian construction site. Earlier studies found that 95% of the freedom fighters cited in secondary school social studies textbooks were male, with women activists barely mentioned. This is what scholars call the “null curriculum” – what is left out is as powerful as what is included.

The impact on student aspirations 🔗

When a girl never sees a woman scientist, soldier, or engineer in her books, she absorbs an unspoken lesson: those spaces are not for her. When a boy never sees a man cooking or caring for a baby, he learns that caregiving is unmanly. These are not minor issues – they shape the careers students dream of, the subjects they choose at higher secondary, and the lives they imagine for themselves.

Schools as sites of resistance and change 🔗

Here is the more hopeful part of the story. The same institution that reinforces stereotypes can also dismantle them. Schools reach almost every child in the country, which gives them unmatched power to reshape gender norms – provided they are designed and run with intention.

Policy push: NEP 2020 and the Gender Inclusion Fund 🔗

India’s National Education Policy 2020 has set up a Gender Inclusion Fund especially for girls and transgender students to provide equitable quality education. The policy approaches gender as a “cross-cutting priority” and explicitly recognises socio-economically disadvantaged groups, which includes female and transgender individuals.

Schemes like the Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalayas (KGBVs) – residential schools for girls from SC, ST, OBC, minority and BPL families in educationally backward blocks – have been a major intervention. As of 2023, over 5,600 KGBVs had been sanctioned with an enrolment of nearly 6.88 lakh girls. These schools have helped retain girls who would otherwise have dropped out due to distance, safety concerns, or household responsibilities.

Revising textbooks and training teachers 🔗

Some states have begun rewriting the script. Maharashtra’s State Bureau of Textbook Production revised many textbook images in 2019, and UNESCO has reported that Grade 2 textbooks in Maharashtra now show men and women sharing household chores, depicting a female doctor and a male chef. Kerala has also made explicit efforts to remove gender stereotypes from its books, including curriculum revisions and gender-neutral uniforms in selected schools.

Teacher training is equally critical. UNESCO emphasises that teacher education can assist teachers to reflect on and overcome their biases. Gender sensitisation modules in pre-service and in-service training help teachers notice their own patterns – who they call on, who they praise, and who they discipline.

Whole-school approaches 🔗

Isolated efforts by one progressive teacher rarely change institutional culture. What works better is a “whole-school approach” – where every adult in the school, from the principal to the support staff, commits to gender-equitable practices. This includes mixed seating arrangements, equal representation in school leadership roles, encouragement for girls in STEM and boys in arts, and zero tolerance for gendered bullying or harassment.

Co-educational schools, when run thoughtfully, can be powerful spaces for boys and girls to see each other as equals rather than opposites. Simple practices – like rotating the role of class monitor, ensuring girls captain sports teams, or having boys help with classroom decoration – quietly chip away at the hidden curriculum.

The road ahead 🔗

Transforming schools into agents of gender equality is not a one-time reform; it is an ongoing project. It requires curriculum writers to consciously diversify representation, teachers to examine their everyday interactions, parents to support non-traditional choices, and students themselves to question the “common sense” they have been taught. The classrooms of today are quite literally writing the gender norms of tomorrow’s workplaces, homes, and political spaces.

Schools cannot single-handedly undo centuries of patriarchy. But because they touch nearly every child during their most formative years, they remain one of the most powerful levers we have for change. The question is not whether schools will socialise children into gender roles – they always will. The question is which roles, and whose vision of equality, they choose to teach.

What do you think? Looking back at your own school years, can you recall a moment when a teacher, textbook, or classroom rule shaped your idea of what boys or girls “should” do – and would you challenge it today? If you were designing a gender-equal school, what is the very first thing you would change?

References

1. https://book.all-means-all.education/ama-2025-en/chapter/gender-and-school-policy/
2. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/397651320_GENDER_SOCIALIZATION_IN_EDUCATIONAL_INSTITUTIONS_A_STUDY_OF_TEACHER_ATTITUDES_AND_CLASSROOM_PRACTICES
3. https://gem-report-2020.unesco.org/gender-report/teachers-attitudes-on-gender-affect-student-education-experiences/
4. https://openoregon.pressbooks.pub/socgender/chapter/7-2-gender-socialization-inside-education/
5. https://www.cgdev.org/blog/analysing-gender-bias-school-textbooks-india
6. https://www.ideasforindia.in/topics/environment/analysing-gender-bias-in-school-textbooks-in-india.html
7. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12142-024-00726-7
8. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1944287
9. https://gem-report-2020.unesco.org/gender-report/countries-are-still-falling-short-in-developing-textbooks-free-of-gender-based-stereotypes/
10. https://gem-report-2017.unesco.org/en/chapter/gender_accountability_through_school/