Gender bias within the history curriculum is reflected within broader societal inequalities. It is these societal inequalities that are shaping the views of students, as well as creating their take on the past. The history curriculum has been pushing a male centred historical narrative, especially with political and military figures. This unbalanced representation of women in the curriculum creates a distorted understanding of history, as well as reinforcing gender bias within society.
With a focus on male figures such as Adolf Hitler and Winston Churchill, the understanding of male dominance, leadership and authority is exemplified. Although they are significant historical figures, the failure to include women creates a warped perspective of the period, and further marginalises the voices of women.[1] The role of women in history have been minimised drastically, they are not shown to be active agents, but characters of side stories and case studies.
The framing women’s contributions
The GCSE history curriculum does include content about women, such as the Suffragettes and the role of women in the Second World War.[2] Although these are key moments for women, they seldom encourage wider discussions and do not allow students to gain a fair perspective of women as agents of change. When historical events with women are being taught, they are often presented to be an anomaly in a male dominated world.
This can be evidently seen in the portrayal of women in World War Two. The role women took in in the second world war is often shaped as a job of necessity, as opposed of showing women as active participants in the war efforts.[3] They are portrayed as stepping up into male-facing jobs, as they were the last resort, and not them reshaping gender norms in a time of crisis. The huge lifestyle changes that woman took on rapidly is often minimised by it being a temporary response to the developing war, again, not allowing students to lead into a wider discussion on how this changed the path for women in the future. The way this is taught does not allow for a deep understanding, and it reinforces the understanding that women only stepped up out of necessity, and not in order to create social, economic, and political change.
The Suffragettes are represented as individuals, such as the works of Emily Davison and Emmaline Pankhurst. Although they are key activists from the Suffragettes and deserve the recognition, there is an ignorance presented towards their long-term goals, political campaign, and life-taking riots; with this only briefly covered.[4] The ignorance towards how deep their commitments to achieving equality was further marginalises the voices of women, creating gender bias.
The minimal representation of women in the GCSE history curriculum directly contributes to creating gender bias, by suggesting that women do not have a forefront in history. Their contributions are limited, and are strictly emotional and dependable, rather then agents of change. Even when women are shown to have a role in the political, social, and economic change, they are shown to have small roles and remain in the backseat. Their contributions seldom encourage students to develop a deeper understanding of female activists, and it does not cater for a wider discussion. The GCSE history curriculum does recognise women and their presence, but not their power and intelligence.
Gendered Language
The use of gendered language and imagery in GCSE textbooks and exam materials further maintains gender bias within the curriculum. With the textbooks playing such an important role in the studying for students, the language used plays a vital role in shaping the views they form, as well as reinforcing stereotypical understanding of gender roles in history.[5]
A consistent issue that is seen with educational textbooks is the use of language that is used for describing male and female figures. Male historical figures, such as Adolf Hitler and Winston Churchill are often portrayed as strong leaders, men with authority, and strong influence. The emotive language used for women takes away their intellectual power and replaces it with emotional resilience. Although not a negative, it does frame women to be supporting side characters, while men are shown as strong leading actors.[6]
When looking at the sections on women in the second world war in curriculum textbooks, the gender dynamic is reinforced. The woman are presented as mothers, nurses, factory workers, and care givers. Which is a huge contrast to men, as they have been presented to be strong negotiators and war heroes.[7] Although this seems minor, it is a defining factor in the continuation of gender bias in the history curriculum, showing men to be strong leaders and at the centre of change, with women in supporting roles, minimised to background extras.
Imagery used in textbooks is equally as important as the language used.[8] When looking at a range of different images from different GCSE history textbooks, it is evident that men are to be presented as strong leaders, emphasising masculinity.[9] Men are often shown at war, giving speeches behind a tall podium, or in important meetings. In contrast, women are often portrayed as home makers, mothers, and as domesticated beings that are there to support the men. The images used in textbooks are providing students with the visual understanding that women are not active agents of change, whereas men are.
Marginalisation through omission
Although the language and imagery used is extremely influential in the construction of the views of students, the omission of women is equally as problematic.[10] The absence of women from most core history topics conveys a powerful message about whose stories of the past should be told. It comes with the understanding that women’s history is inferior to the history that is centred around men, and any contributions women had in making history is not as valued as that of men’s.
With all this in mind, it creates the question as to if the curriculum minimises the contributions of women, as such with women in the second world war, or if the curriculum topics simply do not allow for women to be valued and discussed. Topics taught in high school history include The Romans, The Norman Conquest, The Tudors, and Germany and the Second World War.[11] These topics are heavily based on politics, warfare and diplomacy and are all heavily dominated by male figures and leaders. Even when topics include aspects on women, such as the Industrial Revolution and Elizabeth Fry, they are only mentioned in frequent when compared to men.[12] This reinforces the understanding that women are not active agents of change, and the voices of men should be heard far louder than voices of women.
Furthermore, this can also be seen in the topic the Tudors. Mary I and Elizabeth I are both important people when learning about the Tudors, yet there power in the English monarchy is presented as an anomaly in a male-dominated world.[13] Their contributions are often minimised to the men that are around them, such as Henry VIII and suiters. The political power and influence they hold is seldom deeply explored. This can be seen when studying Queen Elizabeth I.[14] Her long reign often comes with the understanding that she never married and died a virgin queen. Although her sexual pleasantries did not impact her political, social, and economic influence, it somehow always gets a mention.
The overall thematic breadth of history has been impacted through the omission of women. With favouritism shown towards military and political history, the contributions from women are forced to take a back seat.[15] Although women have not been the most active in a military or political understanding, they have been very active in other areas of social change. Women have been most active in other historical events, such as education reform, religious movements, and policy.
The omission of women centred history is disserving students and further allowing for a gender bias and the marginalisation of women. With no efforts made to include diverse voices, and exam specific langue used such as ‘core’ to describe male-focused topics, systemic sexism has been allowed to remain with little advocacy.
In order for omission to be challenged and changed, the history curriculum needs to be re-evaluated and changed to represent the vast roles women and men took on in creating history.
Causes for gender bias
The focus on military and political history is one reason for a male dominated history curriculum. These topics include the study of Kings and Prime Ministers, with this being heavily dominated by men.[16] Although they do cover important topics that should be taught, it fails to pair this with other types of history that is female dominated. Such as social and cultural history. This clear failure to be a well-represented curriculum creates a false perspective on historical understanding and enables misogyny to remain present in education.
Main exam specifications, such as Edexcel, AQA, and OCR all follow the core thematic framework which limits optional topic units.[17] With the majority of thematic topics being male centred, this further disallows for schools to teach a well-represented history education. With this in mind, it is absolutely possible for a GCSE history exam paper to not include any aspect of history on women and could potentially justify the lack of teaching on women’s history.[18]
The underrepresentation of women is not all down to the curriculum. Limited access to inclusive resources and no funding for professional development also contribute to the lack of diverse representation. Even if schools and teachers wanted to make optional inclusive topics for their students, without the right access and budget to resources, they can’t.[19]
Gender bias in the GCSE history curriculum is more complex then what would be thought, in order for a diverse history education, systematic changes need to be implemented and professional development days need to be made widely available and affordable.
Consequences
With the historical narrative focusing on male voices, it may lead to the disengagement of female students. With hardly any female representation, female students may feel undervalued and unimportant, leading to an impact on confidence and academic engagement. A diverse curriculum would benefit everybody, allowing students to challenge gender bias, stereotypes, and misogyny.[20]
[1] Audrey Osler, “Still Hidden from History? The Representation of Women in Recently Published History Textbooks,” Oxford Review of Education 20, no. 2 (1994): 219–35, https://doi.org/10.2307/1050624.
[2] Department for Education, “The National Curriculum in England Key Stages 3 and 4 Framework Document,” GOV.UK, December 2014, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5da7291840f0b6598f806433/Secondary_national_curriculum_corrected_PDF.pdf.
[3] BBC Bitesize, “The Contribution of Women to the War Effort – Life during Wartime – WJEC – GCSE History Revision – WJEC,” BBC Bitesize, 2025, https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/zqf4srd/revision/5.
[4] BBC Bitesize, “The Suffragette Movement,” BBC Bitesize, 2025, https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zh6nsk7#z9kjqfr.
[5] Claire L. Parkin and Sharron Mackenzie, “Is There Gender Bias in Key Stage 3 Science Textbooks?: Content Analysis Using the Gender Bias 14 (GB14) Measurement Tool.,” Advanced Journal of Professional Practice 1, no. 1 (November 29, 2017), https://doi.org/10.22024/UniKent/03/ajpp.426.
[6] Firda Agus Kristiyawan and Ida Putri Rarasati, “GENDER REPRESENTATION in LANGUAGE TEXTBOOKS: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS,” TRANSFORMATIONAL LANGUAGE LITERATURE and TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW in LEARNING (TRANSTOOL) 2, no. 4 (October 5, 2023): 19–23, https://doi.org/10.55047/transtool.v2i4.1385.
[7] BBC Bitesize, “WW2: Did the War Change Life for Women?,” BBC Teach, 2024, https://www.bbc.co.uk/teach/articles/zbktwty.
[8] Meliha Köse, “Analysis of Visuals of Women in the 9th Grade History Textbook,” International Journal of Progressive Education 19, no. 4 (August 1, 2023): 18–38, https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2023.579.2.
[9] John Child, “Edexcel GCSE (9-1) History Weimar and Nazi Germany, 1918-1939 Student Book : Child, John : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive,” Internet Archive, 2016, https://archive.org/details/edexcel-gcse-weimar-nazi-germany-student-book/page/24/mode/2up.
[10] Maria Popova, “Oppression by Omission: The Untold Story of the Women Soldiers Who Dressed and Fought as Men in the Civil War,” The Marginalian, February 28, 2013, https://www.themarginalian.org/2013/02/28/women-soldiers-in-the-civil-war/.
[11] Department for Education, “The National Curriculum in England Key Stages 3 and 4 Framework Document,” GOV.UK, December 2014,
[12] Department for Education, “The National Curriculum in England Key Stages 3 and 4 Framework Document,” GOV.UK, December 2014,
[13] BBC Bitesize, “Elizabeth I – GCSE History – BBC Bitesize,” BBC Bitesize, 2025, https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/topics/zxgvfrd.
[14] BBC Bitesize, “Elizabeth I – GCSE History – BBC Bitesize,” BBC Bitesize, 2025,
[15] Department for Education, “The National Curriculum in England Key Stages 3 and 4 Framework Document,” GOV.UK, December 2014,
[16] Department for Education, “The National Curriculum in England Key Stages 3 and 4 Framework Document,” GOV.UK, December 2014
[17] BBC Bitesize, “GCSE History – BBC Bitesize,” BBC Bitesize, 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/subjects/zj26n39.
[18] Department for Education, “The National Curriculum in England Key Stages 3 and 4 Framework Document,” GOV.UK, December 2014
[19] Simon Burgess and Dave Thomson, “The Impact of GCSE Reforms on the Attainment Gap between Disadvantaged Pupils and Their Peers,” 2019, https://www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/MakingtheGrade2019.pdf.
[20] Saarah Ahmed, “ What Is the Impact of the Lack of Black and Ethnic Minority Representation in British History?,” 2023, https://mcb.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/3.4.5.pdf.
Gender in history 