Lessons in Inequality: Gender Bias in Indian Textbooks and its Link to Societal Attitudes

The researchers employed gendered word frequency analysis quantifying proportion of gender-specific pronouns and nouns (such as ‘he’, ‘she’, masculine versus feminine terms) appearing in textbook content. The article references ‘methodology used previously in Crawfurd, Saintis-Miller and Todd (2024)’ establishing this as validated approach enabling cross-country comparisons with UK, US, Australia, and Sub-Saharan Africa. The technique also analyzed associations between gendered words and achievement, appearance, home, and work-related language, revealing patterns like ‘text linking mothers to cooking, and assuming doctors are male.’ This computational linguistics approach offers scalability advantages over close reading—enabling analysis across hundreds of textbooks from multiple state boards—while providing quantifiable metrics (34% female versus 66% male gendered words in NCERT materials) supporting statistical comparison. The method’s limitations include focusing on explicit gendered language potentially missing subtle stereotyping through imagery, narrative roles, or implicit assumptions, and not capturing qualitative aspects like how female characters are portrayed when they do appear. The 2022 Pew Survey measuring progressive attitudes used different methodology—seven questions creating composite index via principal component analysis—enabling correlation analysis between textbook metrics and societal gender norms revealing the counterintuitive Gujarat-Mizoram disconnect central to article’s optimistic reform interpretation.

The article notes this paradox—’States in the South tend to do worse than states in the Hindi belt, despite higher female literacy and workforce participation’—but doesn’t provide causal explanation, instead treating it as additional evidence for central thesis that textbook representation decouples from broader gender indicators. Several hypotheses might explain this pattern, though article doesn’t evaluate them: curriculum development processes may operate independently from socioeconomic outcomes, with textbook committees composed of educators whose gender attitudes don’t necessarily reflect population-wide literacy or employment patterns; southern states’ better economic outcomes might reduce perceived urgency for educational reform addressing gender representation since girls already attend school and women participate in workforce regardless of textbook content; Hindi belt states might have implemented targeted curriculum interventions responding to poorer overall gender indicators; or different cultural frameworks might manifest—southern progressiveness on education and economic participation coexisting with traditional attitudes about family roles and gender norms that curriculum reflects. The pattern strengthens researchers’ optimistic interpretation: if regions with objectively better gender outcomes (literacy, workforce participation) still show poor textbook representation, this suggests curriculum reform doesn’t require prior socioeconomic transformation and operates through different mechanisms, making it accessible intervention point even in less-developed contexts. The disconnect also implies textbook improvement won’t automatically follow from economic development, requiring deliberate policy attention regardless of broader advancement.

The article mentions ‘Kerala is making explicit efforts to remove gender stereotypes from their books, partly in response to a spate of deaths from domestic abuse in the state; demonstrating the government’s belief in the role of textbooks in shaping attitudes.’ This connection operates through theory that educational materials normalizing traditional gender roles and male authority contribute to attitudes enabling domestic violence by teaching children that women’s subordination is natural and acceptable. A ‘spate of deaths’ suggesting cluster of high-profile domestic violence fatalities apparently prompted public pressure for systemic responses beyond criminal justice interventions, with education reform positioned as long-term prevention strategy addressing cultural foundations rather than merely punishing individual perpetrators. This reflects expanding recognition that domestic violence represents not isolated pathology but cultural pattern requiring institutional transformation across multiple domains including schools. Kerala’s response demonstrates government accepting textbooks as attitude-shaping tools rather than neutral information vehicles—if curriculum can contribute to violence-enabling attitudes through stereotyping, then reformed curriculum can potentially reduce future violence by teaching gender equality from childhood. The case illustrates how crisis moments create political opportunity for reforms otherwise facing bureaucratic inertia, as domestic abuse deaths generate urgency and public attention enabling advocates to overcome resistance to curriculum change. Whether textbook reform actually reduces domestic violence remains empirical question requiring longitudinal evaluation, but Kerala government’s willingness to try indicates shifting understanding of educational materials as policy levers for social transformation.

Readlite provides curated articles with comprehensive analysis including summaries, key points, vocabulary building, and practice questions across 9 different RC question types. Our Ultimate Reading Course offers 365 articles with 2,400+ questions to systematically improve your reading comprehension skills.

This article is rated Advanced level, requiring sophisticated understanding of quantitative social science methodology, Indian education system structure, and ability to evaluate counterintuitive empirical findings while tracking multiple simultaneous arguments about cultural determinism, policy autonomy, and reform feasibility. The piece assumes familiarity with educational policy frameworks (understanding difference between national NCERT curriculum and state board systems, competitive entrance exam role in curriculum alignment, decentralization’s implications), quantitative research conventions (interpreting percentage comparisons, correlation analysis, principal component indices, understanding what ‘surprisingly little correlation’ means methodologically), and Indian geographic/political context (recognizing state names, Hindi belt versus southern states distinction, Mumbai’s significance as financial capital). Advanced readers must track parallel arguments: documenting persistent bias (34% female NCERT representation despite decades of attention), revealing regional variation (Gujarat exceptional, Tamil Nadu worst-performing, southern states paradoxically worse than Hindi belt), establishing attitude-representation disconnect (Gujarat/Mizoram contrast), and advocating reform feasibility (prevailing norms needn’t obstruct curriculum change). The piece requires evaluating optimistic interpretation of counterintuitive finding—readers must assess whether attitude-representation disconnect actually demonstrates reform tractability or merely reveals complex relationship requiring further investigation. Understanding involves recognizing rhetorical strategy positioning Gujarat paradox as enabling rather than puzzling, serving advocacy purpose preventing cultural determinism excuses rationalizing inaction. This difficulty level suits readers interested in education policy, gender studies, or development issues capable of critically evaluating social science claims while appreciating how empirical findings get strategically framed to support particular policy recommendations—preparing for graduate-level discourse where quantitative evidence combines with normative argumentation in policy advocacy contexts.

The article argues ‘Revising curricula to not only mention women more, but also work towards challenging regressive stereotypes could result in higher economic growth, by encouraging workforce equality, higher female representation in non-traditional roles, and increased female leadership.’ This economic rationale operates through human capital logic: gender-equitable textbooks teaching girls they can pursue any career reduce self-limiting beliefs constraining occupational choices, while teaching boys that women belong in professional roles reduces discriminatory gatekeeping in hiring and promotion. ‘Workforce equality’ suggests more efficient labor allocation when merit rather than gender determines employment, eliminating productivity losses from excluding talented women or misallocating them to lower-skill positions. ‘Non-traditional roles’ implies women entering higher-wage male-dominated fields (STEM, management, skilled trades) increasing aggregate earnings while reducing occupational gender segregation that concentrates women in lower-paid sectors. ‘Increased female leadership’ suggests both corporate governance benefits from diverse perspectives and political representation advantages from women leaders potentially prioritizing different policy areas. The growth argument reflects development economics literature showing gender equality correlates with economic advancement, though causal direction remains debated—does equality enable growth or does growth enable equality? The article positions textbook reform as upstream intervention shaping next generation’s attitudes before labor market entry, potentially more effective than workplace anti-discrimination policies targeting adult behavior. However, the economic framing serves strategic rhetorical function: providing non-ideological justification for gender equity appealing to policymakers prioritizing development over social justice concerns, making reform defensible through multiple value frameworks simultaneously.

The Ultimate Reading Course covers 9 RC question types: Multiple Choice, True/False, Multi-Statement T/F, Text Highlight, Fill in the Blanks, Matching, Sequencing, Error Spotting, and Short Answer. This comprehensive coverage prepares you for any reading comprehension format you might encounter.