Sexism in the Classroom: Analysis from a Teacher’s Point of View

Abstract

Despite the progress made in recent decades, sexism is a prevalent problem today and has permeated society at a systemic level, including education. This study seeks to analyse the perception of sexism by senior secondary school teachers and trainee teachers. The research was carried out using qualitative methodology, using a semi-structured interview as a data collection instrument. The analysis consisted of the collection of teachers’ experiences for subsequent evaluation and comparison. The results obtained describe similarities between the groups in the perception of sexism in the classroom, but distinguish the justification behind sexist behaviour, and make explicit the lack of specific training for teachers in both groups in the area of sexism in science. These results point to the perceived need for more comprehensive training on sexism among secondary school teachers, according to the experiences and interpretations reported by the participants.

1. Introduction

The 21st century is bringing great advances in human rights. Despite these advances and the optimistic perception of recent decades regarding the conquest of women’s rights and freedoms, structural problems continue to exist today that affect all levels of society, discriminate against women and limit their participation. This paper seeks to elucidate how gender stereotypes have permeated educational institutions and the main agents of education in adolescence, their teachers.

Sexism, considered a global health problem (WHO 2021), encompasses a set of behaviours that project an attitude of discrimination towards certain population groups based on existing gender differences. It is characterised by the formation of asymmetrical relationships in which the male gender is provided with privileges and power over the female gender. From an individual point of view, two paths can be taken, often conditioned by belonging to one of two groups—the oppressed or the oppressor—typically occupied by women and men, respectively (Cameron 2001; Hammond et al. 2018).

For its part, feminism is a movement that arose from dissatisfaction with inequality between women and men, years of struggle against sexism that led to the expansion of the defence of women’s rights in multiple disciplines. The school environment was one of the areas of interest for the implementation of gender equality, and with this, the concept of coeducation emerged. The emergence of coeducation in Europe and North America during the mid-20th century marked a turning point in the recognition of schools as spaces where gender inequalities could be reproduced or challenged (Subirats 1994). The first steps of this proposal for change began with the acceptance of schools as educational environments that were not truly neutral. Textbooks, as well as representations of relevant personalities in different subjects, tend to be monopolised by male figures. This promoted the intention to implement ideas from the feminist movement, which seek gender equality in the educational perspective of schools, through the understanding of education as a useful tool for the transition to social progress (Heras-Sevilla et al. 2021).

In this sense, the responsibility and power of teachers as a primary role models for learning during adolescence must be recognised, given the amount of time young people invest in their education every day. The establishment of environments conducive to learning, as well as to education, not only academic but also moral and civic, necessitates the investment of resources to also train teachers so that they can perform their work correctly (Gajda et al. 2022).

Given the presence of gender stereotypes in secondary school classrooms and the capacity of sexism to permeate different social contexts, teachers hold a central responsibility as educational role models in promoting a shift toward more egalitarian values (Sanger and Osguthorpe 2013). In this context, the present study seeks to analyse sexism in the classroom by comparing the perspectives of trainee teachers and senior teachers in Biology and Geology within compulsory secondary education.

The study is guided by the following research questions: How do teachers perceive sexism and gender stereotypes in their classrooms? How do teachers assess their own training in relation to sexism? What tools and resources do teachers perceive as available for promoting gender equality? How do teachers evaluate the role of teaching materials in relation to sexism?

To address these questions, a qualitative study was conducted based on a Grounded Theory approach, which allows categories and interpretations to emerge inductively from participants’ accounts, using semi-structured interviews as the primary data collection tool (Alemu et al. 2015).

2. Gender Stereotypes, Sexism and Teacher Training

Gender roles, understood as the behaviours and attitudes expected of men and women and based on a sociocultural construct, shape and influence the construction of gender identity. From this, a framework is created in which patterns of conduct and behaviour are defined that will serve to define all people within a society, from a dichotomous view of what it means to be a man or a woman, which is based on so-called gender stereotypes (Agadullina et al. 2022; García-Sánchez et al. 2019). In recent decades, multiple instruments have emerged that have been of great help to research on gender stereotypes. Some examples are the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) and the Personal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ), developed by Sandra Bem and Spence, respectively. Their application served as a method of analysing the reproduction of gender-based stereotypes; however, their high dependence on societies and the changing nature of these societies generate the need for continuous review (García-Sánchez et al. 2019).

On the other hand, in relation to sexism, several problems arise, one of them due to its ambivalence, described by Glick and Fiske (1997), in which sexist behaviours, understood as hostile or benevolent, can complicate the perception of sexism. This is a problem that arises both in the assessment of the consequences of typically sexist behaviours and in the detection of these sexist behaviours, since the capacity of benevolent sexism can be masked as beneficial to women’s rights and presented as a supposed antagonist to hostile sexism. This means that sexist behaviour may not only fail to be detected as such, but may even be mistakenly considered positive for women’s rights movements (Kirkman and Oswald 2020; Rudman and Fetterolf 2014). Other factors are also relevant to our study, such as the impact of sexism in the educational sphere. The ability to point out sexism is not as obvious as it might seem, and in many cases, it is difficult for people to identify problematic behaviours associated with sexism and gender stereotypes if they are not trained in this field. This is the case with teachers, among whom there is a certain consensus among educators regarding the implicit ethical and moral dimensions of teaching practice (García-Sánchez et al. 2019). However, this reality is accompanied by a situation in which some teachers also consider that the training they have received does not sufficiently prepare them to carry out this moral education work (Sanger and Osguthorpe 2013).

It is also necessary to understand that prior beliefs and knowledge that contribute to the formation of morality can be extremely resistant to change, and our role as teachers will be to find the right approach so as not to reinforce problematic morals and behaviours. However, teachers have a wide variety of methodologies and beliefs, making the study of good teaching practice in terms of morality more complex. These beliefs can permeate teaching, modifying the methodologies used or the quality of the teaching offered (Reichert et al. 2021; Sanger and Osguthorpe 2013).

Current studies, such as that by Thornberg and Oğuz (Thornberg and Oğuz 2016), discuss the continuity between the concepts of moral education and citizenship education. These concepts are interesting for the teaching profession. At the same time, they show a willingness to educate their students not only in an academic setting, but also in social skills and values. However, teachers often lack metalanguage when addressing issues of morality and are guided by personal experiences rather than reliable sources when addressing these issues.

Teacher training will therefore be a highly relevant factor in assessing how adolescents are educated. A teacher who is able to manage the resources necessary to tackle sexism will potentially be able to train their students to use positive strategies to deal with sexism, rather than having to resort to avoidance behaviours, perpetuating discrimination and reinforcing inaction in the face of sexism (Sáinz et al. 2020; Van Putten et al. 2013). Therefore, this should not be a topic that is dealt with exclusively in a self-taught manner by teachers interested in the educational and revisionist nature of morality.

Sexism in educational contexts cannot be understood solely as a set of individual attitudes or isolated behaviors, but also as a moral and ethical issue embedded in teaching practice. Teachers are not only responsible for academic instruction, but also play a key role in students’ moral and civic development. For this reason, examining teachers’ perceptions of sexism necessarily involves considering how they interpret their ethical responsibility in addressing discriminatory behaviors within the classroom.

3. Objectives

The general objective of this study is to explore and compare the perceptions of trainee and senior secondary school teachers of Biology and Geology regarding sexism and gender stereotypes in the classroom, with particular attention to their self-assessed training and their views on the adequacy of available educational resources. This objective, in turn, is specified in the following specific objectives:

• To analyse teachers’ self-perceptions of their training on sexism and gender stereotypes, as well as how they interpret and respond to sexist behaviours in the classroom.
• To examine teachers’ assessments of the teaching materials and institutional resources available for addressing sexism and promoting gender equality in secondary education.
• To explore teachers’ views on the role of teacher training in addressing sexism within the classroom, particularly in relation to their academic, ethical, and moral responsibilities.

4. Materials and Methods

The methodology is based on a qualitative approach, following principles of Grounded Theory as outlined by Glaser and Strauss. The focus is on the interpretation of subjective results collected through semi-structured interviews (Vivar et al. 2010). As this study focuses on the personal and subjective experiences of participants, the findings are not intended to be statistically generalizable. Instead, the aim is to provide an in-depth, exploratory understanding of how teachers perceive and interpret sexism in the classroom, following an inductive qualitative logic. All of this will allow meaning to be extracted from the data in order to reach final conclusions despite the absence of prior hypotheses (Gutiérrez-Braojos et al. 2017; Hernández 2014; Molina-Pérez and Luengo Navas 2021).

4.1. Selection Process and Description of Participants

This study was conducted in Granada, a city in southern Spain (Andalusia), within the Spanish public secondary education system. Spanish education policy formally incorporates gender equality and coeducation as transversal principles, although their implementation largely depends on individual schools and teachers. This institutional context shapes how sexism is recognized and addressed in everyday classroom practice. The study participants are trainee teachers, consisting of students from the Master’s Degree in Compulsory Secondary Education and Baccalaureate Teaching, Vocational Training and Language Teaching (MAES) at the University of Granada, specialising in Biology and Geology (trainee teachers), and experienced teachers who have been teaching for more than 10 years (senior teachers). Interviews were conducted with senior teachers and trainee teachers who were teaching Biology and Geology at the time of the research in compulsory secondary education centres to ensure that they could provide data of interest for our study. The sampling process used a snowball strategy. The first participants were trainee teachers, who then helped identify senior teachers from their practical phase tutors. The interviews were finally conducted with five trainee teachers and five senior teachers during 2023, reaching a total of ten interviews. The small number of interviews was compensated for by data saturation for both groups of teachers, in accordance with Glaser and Strauss’ Grounded Theory, reaching a set of interviews in which the collection of further data was interrupted when no further relevant information appeared (Gutiérrez-Braojos et al. 2017).

The sample size was determined following qualitative research criteria rather than statistical representativeness. Participants were selected through purposive sampling to ensure variation in professional experience (trainee and senior teachers), which allowed for the exploration of contrasting perspectives on sexism in the classroom. Data collection continued until thematic saturation was reached, understood as the point at which additional interviews did not produce new relevant codes or analytical categories. In the final interviews conducted within each group, the information obtained largely reinforced previously identified themes, indicating that sufficient depth had been achieved for the purposes of this exploratory study. This occurred within each participant group, as later interviews largely confirmed previously identified patterns rather than introducing new analytical categories (Alemu et al. 2015; Vivar et al. 2010).

It should be noted that this research has ensured compliance with general principles and ethical considerations. In accordance with these principles, the data from the interviews was collected in such a way that it was stored anonymously, eliminating all data that could identify the participants or the people involved. In addition to being anonymous, the data was collected with the prior informed consent of all participants.

4.2. Data Collection Instrument

Data was obtained through a semi-structured qualitative interview. Specifically, the interview used was called “Teachers’ perception of sexism in the classroom”. The questions were chosen using adaptations from the interview by Gajda et al. (2022). This interview proposes a series of questions that are interesting for the research and also offers a categorisation of groups of questions that were later used as a guide to establish the coding categories during the qualitative analysis. The interview design also took into account the theoretical framework, adding questions that met the objectives of our research.

The questions can be grouped into thematic blocks, three of which are established in the research by Gajda et al. (2022), while the remaining two blocks were added for this study:

(a)

Perception of gender stereotypes among students;

(b)

Teacher response;

(c)

Teaching materials;

(d)

Teacher training;

(e)

Sexism in the history of science.

The section on perceptions of stereotypical behaviour contains five items that seek to obtain information on perceptions of differences in behaviour, performance, different preferences for the subject of Biology and Geology, and the causes of these differences according to gender. The second block, called teacher response, consists of two items related to teachers’ assessment and reaction to these sexist or stereotypical behaviours. The third block, teaching material, collects information on male and female representations in biology and geology textbooks and consists of two items. The teacher training section has three items and inquires about specific training on sexism and gender identity for teachers. Finally, the fifth section, on sexism in the history of science, contains a single item related to the third and fourth thematic sections, representing the sexist and discriminatory narrative underlying the history of science.

All interviews were conducted in Spanish, the participants’ native language. For the purposes of publication, interview excerpts were translated into English by the research team. To ensure accuracy, translations focused on preserving the original meaning rather than literal wording.

4.3. Data Processing and Description of the Category System

Data processing was carried out using QSR NVivo 14 qualitative analysis software, and NVivo 14 was used as a tool to support data organization, coding, and comparison; however, all analytical decisions were made by the researchers following theoretical and interpretative criteria rather than automated procedures. An initial coding scheme was developed inductively after repeated readings of the transcripts. Codes were iteratively refined and grouped into higher-order categories through team discussions. While intercoder agreement was not statistically calculated, coding decisions were collectively reviewed to enhance analytical consistency. Qualitative data underwent a complex analysis process. To process the data, we followed the sequence of steps established by inductive procedures and grounded theory (Hernández 2014). Based on these criteria, we analysed the most frequently used terms in the interviews. This allowed for the establishment of pre-categories which, in combination with those deducible from the model interview extracted from Gajda et al. (2022), would serve as a means of grouping the subsequent coding according to the themes present. After selecting the pre-categories, the software’s cluster analysis tool was used to group the elements according to similarities in coding, measured using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. The results of this analysis are shown in the form of straight lines associating the pre-categories. Following the procedure established by Grounded Theory, an emergent selection of categories was made. In addition, the coding followed the steps described by Grounded Theory (Hernández 2014): open coding, axial coding, and selective coding.

Data analysis followed an inductive process informed by Grounded Theory principles, involving constant comparison between data segments and emerging categories. Initial open coding was conducted to identify relevant concepts within the interview transcripts. These codes were then grouped through axial coding to establish relationships between categories, which were further refined during selective coding to construct the final thematic structure (Alemu et al. 2015; Hernández 2014; Molina-Pérez and Luengo Navas 2021).

The category system was finally established by grouping the subcategories into categories and the categories into categorical families according to the theme deduced from the coding they contain. These are described in detail below (

Table 1. Descriptive table of categories.

Family	Category Subcategory		Code	Definition
Perception of Sexism	Absence of Gender Stereotypes		AE	Responses expressing absence or lack of perception of gender stereotypes in the classroom.
	Biological Causes of Development		CBD	Interventions in which differences in behaviour among students are justified by their degree of maturity. Potentially associated with students’ biological gender and gender identity.
	Gender-Independent Causes		CIG	Justification of different behaviours among students as dependent on each person’s individual context and NOT as something associated with the individual’s gender.
	Gender-based Performance Inequality		DDG	Perception of differences in student performance based on gender.
	Disruption due to sexism		DS	Circumstances in which sexist behaviour has caused difficulties in the normal performance of teaching duties.
	Behavioural Stereotypes		EC	Differences in behaviour between boys and girls attributable to gender stereotypes.
	Equality in performance according to gender		IDG	No gender differences were found among students.
	Different interest in ByG according to gender		IDBGG	There are notable differences in terms of predisposition towards biology and geology depending on the gender of the students.
	Equal interest in biology and geology according to gender		IIBGG	Behaviours that show equal acceptance of the subject and equal enjoyment regardless of the gender of the students.
	Machismo		M	Behaviour by male students that could be considered sexist towards female students.
	Normalisation of sexism		NS	References to the acceptance of gender stereotypes through normalisation, or to the surprising perception of the increase in female representation.
Teachers against Sexism	Teacher Training	Self-taught Training	FA	References to a lack of formal training, compensated for by the willingness and efforts of teachers themselves to seek out material related to sexism and gender equality.
		Poor Training	FE	Less involvement in acquiring training on sexism in science and the perception of limited training.
		Official Training	FO	Mention of completion of courses, seminars or attendance at official talks (proposed by the administration, the Andalusian Regional Government or official local management bodies).
	Rejection of Sexism		RS	Responses from teachers or students in training that punish, address, interrupt or correct sexist behaviour.
	Breaking Stereotypes		RE	The teacher talks about breaking down preconceived ideas related to sexist concepts or gender stereotypes.
Institutions against Sexism	Training tools on sexism		HF	Availability of resources of interest offered at the centre for training students and/or teachers on sexism and gender identity.
	Gender Equality in Teaching Materials		IMD	References to the presence of teaching materials that promote the role of women in science.
	Teaching Materials with Low Equality		EIMD	References to unequal representation of gender identities in teaching materials, as well as representations based on gender stereotypes.
	Sexism in the History of Science		SHC	Interventions on sexism in the history of science provided by teachers and outside the tools offered by the centre itself.

).

The QSR NVivo14 tools allow us to create a node tree as a useful representation for grouping categories according to coincidences in their coding. If we select the categories with the greatest relevance to the study and also focus on those that show a higher coincidence index using the Jaccard correlation coefficient, we will have found the categories with the greatest real impact on our study.

5. Results

First, we will mention the perception of sexism in the classroom associated with the identification of gender stereotypes in students. Next, we will review how teachers deal with sexist behaviours and elements in the classroom and their relationship with the tools they may have received in their professional training for this purpose. Finally, the role of schools, teaching staff and the material selected by them in normalising or breaking sexist stereotypes in historical and academic contexts will be described. These categories are described by adopting the perspectives shown by the two groups of participants and analysing their differences and similarities (emic) together with the researchers’ perspective (etic)1.

5.1. The Perception of Sexism in the Classroom Through the Identification of Gender Stereotypes

This first family is the most relevant because it includes 11 categories, described in the previous section. The interventions compiled within these categories show how all senior teachers reported to have glimpsed stereotypical behaviour in their classrooms:

“Perhaps, when it comes to receiving news, it is a way in which it is quite clear how the male gender, regardless of whether the news is good or bad, tends to receive it in a more boisterous manner. When the female gender receives news, they are more inclined to discuss it than the males.”

(ESC2.5)

In contrast, most trainee teachers described their classes as balanced, with no evidence of sexism or stereotypical behaviour. As discussed in studies such as Rudman and Fetterolf (2014) and Agadullina et al. (2022), the duality of modern sexism can make it quite difficult for people who are not trained or sensitised to this issue to identify these discriminatory behaviours, which can lead to their normalisation:

“There is no such expression… other than that some girls may be more feminine in the way they dress or communicate. I didn’t see a need to emphasise ‘I’m a girl’.”

(ESC1.2)

“No, honestly, in my experience in internships and such, I haven’t seen any behaviour of that kind.”

(ESC1.4)

To correctly understand this different perception of student behaviour in the classroom, we must remember the weight that social expectations place on people’s behaviour. More specifically, and as described in the research by Gajda et al. (2022), secondary schools can be understood as environments that structure and shape multiple social interactions between students and between students and teachers. Within these contexts, expectations related to gender may operate as self-fulfilling prophecies, influencing students’ behaviour and reinforcing gender stereotypes over time (Diogo et al. 2023). These are environments in which social contexts and thought processes based on self-fulfilling prophecies cause students’ socialisation to drift towards the acceptance, on occasions, of harmful gender stereotypes. This is a difficult cycle to break, but it can be combated if the patterns of behaviour and their consequences are understood. Thus, we will see that some trainee teachers were able to distinguish sexist behaviour in their students:

“Typically masculine in many of them, typically feminine in practically none that I have seen. And yes, in some you start to see it, because some traits that can be considered sexist, not with their female classmates, but with their female teachers.”

(ESC1.1)

Taken together, these excerpts suggest notable differences in how participants identify and interpret sexist behaviors among students. While some teachers report not having observed explicit sexist conduct, others describe more subtle manifestations of gendered expectations, particularly in relation to classroom participation and interaction styles. This indicates that the perception of sexism is not uniform and may depend on teachers’ sensitivity to implicit gender stereotypes. It is noteworthy how it is mainly boys who, according to the opinion of both teachers who claimed to have seen sexist behaviour, will tend to display sexist, even macho behaviour. Teachers are an important figure in addressing this type of behaviour in the classroom, acting as learning models in the training of students not only academically, but also morally and ethically (Walker and Gleaves 2016):

“At a time when we had sexist behaviour in class, and I was teaching, it wasn’t just an observation…”

(ESC1.1)

“When it comes to expressing their thoughts or asking questions, some boys think that if a girl does it, it’s nonsense, but if a boy does it, it’s well-founded and well-said, or it’s a good question.”

(ESC2.2)

From an interpretative perspective, these responses reflect an understanding of sexism that extends beyond academic performance to include moral and ethical considerations. Participants not only recognize gendered patterns of behavior but also position themselves as responsible for addressing these dynamics as part of their broader educational role. Both groups of teachers asserted the presence of external factors that influenced behaviours potentially interpretable as gender stereotypes, and among those who mentioned causes unrelated to gender, most trainee teachers and some senior teachers justified these behaviours with the lack of maturity and the still early stage of development of adolescents. The faster maturation of women compared to men served in several cases as an argument to reaffirm these gender differences in the early levels of secondary school, which would later fade and disappear:

“Of course, it was more about the individual and not really packaged, or in boxes defined by gender. It was something much more personalised depending on how they had previously developed their learning. […] And I think it was more related to expectations, but not on my part.”

(ESC1.2)

“I don’t know if it’s because of the audiovisual content they consume on social media, but there were a lot of male students who wanted to emphasise their masculinity. Especially in the very early stages, but then, to be honest, not so much.”

(ESC1.2)

“I think it’s both cultural and contextual for each individual. Their background and customs will always make that kid respond more loudly.”

(ESC2.5)

These accounts indicate that participants frequently attribute the emergence of sexist behaviors to external social and cultural influences, such as family environments and media exposure. This tendency suggests a partial externalization of responsibility, where sexism is perceived as originating outside the school context rather than being produced or reinforced within classroom interactions. It is interesting to describe how this sometimes unconscious acceptance of gender stereotypes, as described in the study by Gajda et al. (2022), can also affect teachers. Some examples that showed the surprise of some senior teachers at the breaking of sexist stereotypes are how students expressed their interest in biology and geology, and the perception of the increased representation of women in science as something new:

“I don’t know if it’s a coincidence, because when they reach the 2nd year of secondary school, there are usually more girls than boys.”

(ESC2.3)

Although there were also gender stereotypes ingrained in the minds of some trainee teachers, their presence among the participants was significantly lower:

“No, I don’t think so. Not much difference. In fact, there were girls who wanted to study science, which is the typical thing to say, that girls don’t want to study science.”

(ESC1.5)

Accompanying this break with stereotypes in interest in science, the teachers affirmed a balance in the choice of specialisation towards science and arts:

“No, I’m telling you, both the science and arts and humanities electives are usually chosen according to what they like best or what we guide them towards. More than gender, it’s related to what they want to do after the fourth year of secondary school.”

(ESC2.5)

Taken together, these excerpts illustrate a discourse that simultaneously acknowledges progress toward gender equality in scientific fields while downplaying the persistence of structural gender stereotypes. Although participants report fewer explicit biases, their narratives suggest that gendered expectations continue to influence educational trajectories in subtle ways. Despite the increase in female representation in science degrees, these degrees continue to have an overwhelming male presence, and it is these members who tend to participate in the creation of a sexist climate, based on the false idea of replacement (Biggs et al. 2018).

Overall, the findings from this section suggest that while teachers are generally able to identify overt forms of sexism, more implicit and normalized gender stereotypes are less consistently recognized. Differences between trainee and senior teachers point to varying levels of awareness and critical reflection, highlighting the importance of targeted training to support the identification and active deconstruction of subtle sexist dynamics in classroom settings.

5.2. The Role of Teachers in the Fight Against Sexism

Most teachers express aversion to sexist behaviour, gender stereotypes and machismo. They are particularly sensitive to such behaviour and are keen to educate students to enable them to cope with life in society, establishing an educator–learner relationship in which valuable resources are obtained beyond academic content (Sanger and Osguthorpe 2013; Walker and Gleaves 2016). Despite this willingness, trainee teachers report a need for more specialised training on the subject, especially after experiencing some complex situations in the classroom:

“You can, in a way, guide them towards society’s standards. But the cool thing is that they learn to express themselves as best they can with the means they have. So corrections are always aimed at maintaining that social standard, but we don’t go much further than that. There is no problem that requires us to go further.”

(ESC2.5)

“And secondly, because I didn’t really know how to act, because it shocked me. I didn’t expect it. So, the reaction has been to try to reprimand them more on a behavioural level than on a disciplinary level.”

(ESC1.1)

Taken together, these excerpts suggest that although trainee teachers express a strong ethical commitment to addressing sexist behaviors, their interventions tend to remain superficial and reactive. The lack of specific training appears to limit their capacity to move beyond behavioral correction toward deeper educational work on gender equality and sexism. Sexist behaviour is considered a challenge for many trainee teachers due to their lack of specific training (Heras-Sevilla et al. 2021). They comment that during the theoretical training stage of the master’s degree in education, they had the opportunity to expand their knowledge about sexism and gender identity, but it was an elective subject that did not delve too deeply into the topic, at least in a practical sense:

“Within the master’s degree, I chose the elective… Education for equality. […] It is true that we did not receive any training because the objective of that subject was for us to do the work ourselves. So, if you can consider it self-training, then fine. I didn’t even inform myself or read about it. I just went to do my work and that was it. Of course, when you do that work, you realise the reality and, in the end, having mothers, friends, sisters, you see the reality and you start to focus your mind on it a little, but in terms of external training that I have received, it has not been self-training at all, neither in the master’s programme nor before.”

(ESC1.1)

“There is an elective course called Equality. Well, gender equality, in which they did give us, they mentioned videos and materials that were interesting. In fact, there were some videos on YouTube that were very graphic and explanatory, very cool. Above all, related to consent. But apart from that… Well, they mentioned it, but to me it seemed a bit outdated […].”

(ESC1.2)

These accounts reflect a perception of initial teacher training as insufficiently structured and largely dependent on individual initiative. While opportunities to engage with issues of gender equality are present, their optional nature and limited practical orientation reduce their effectiveness in preparing future teachers to address sexism in real classroom situations. This concern about the training of secondary school teachers is not new, as there is previous research such as that carried out by Heras-Sevilla et al. (2021) in which the concept of “coeducation” and the emerging need to train teachers to focus on eliminating gender stereotypes and sexist discrimination in order to offer a feminist perspective within the academic world is developed.

Although this perception of their own training is more pessimistic among trainee teachers, senior secondary school teachers seem to consider their years of experience as sufficient proof and excuse to claim that they are adequately trained. In some cases, this can lead to problems in the perception of sexism. These teachers explain that their experience over the years can serve as sufficient support, and even comment that having this self-taught training justifies a more lax approach to teaching topics related to sexism and gender identity:

“I take advantage of it when it’s a more obvious case, right? I try to polish that edge a little more with presentations like the ones we’ve done on women in science. I haven’t taken any courses on it, I’m sensitive to the issue because it concerns me as a teacher, as a father and as an individual. But no, I haven’t taken any courses on the subject. I think you can learn without taking courses or having formal training.”

(ESC2.1)

“I have learned it throughout my professional career as a tutor and by taking some CEP courses.”

(ESC2.2)

“And I don’t usually get involved in any issues either. I stick to the facts, and I don’t think it’s my job to get involved in those issues.”

(ESC2.3)

“No specific training. I discover it in textbooks.”

(ESC2.4)

From an interpretative perspective, these responses suggest that senior teachers often equate professional experience with adequate preparation to address sexism. This reliance on self-taught learning and accumulated practice may contribute to a more permissive or detached stance toward gender-related issues, potentially limiting critical engagement with subtle or normalized forms of sexism in the classroom. Despite this difference in the perception of their own training, there is agreement among future teachers and senior secondary school teachers regarding the possible causes that help to consolidate sexist behaviour in secondary school students. Particularly noteworthy is the opinion of teachers who claim that today’s generation of teenagers, especially girls, seem to be more aware of gender ideology and sexism, and are key players in the feminist movement (Diogo et al. 2023):

“But there are already quite a few people who are capable of taking action against these bullies or machistas… Yes, girls may feel inferior at times because of these comments, but fortunately, from what I have seen today, they are much more informed about the issue.”

(ESC1.1)

These accounts indicate that teachers perceive contemporary adolescents, particularly girls, as increasingly aware and proactive in relation to sexism and gender equality. While this perception highlights positive social change, it may also contribute to a partial transfer of responsibility, where the role of the teacher in actively addressing sexist dynamics is perceived as less central. Some trainee teachers commented that they used resources taken from content that teenagers regularly consume to reinforce the ethical training of their students. This, accompanied by a more intuitive use of technology by the trainee teachers, allows for an approach to education that connects with the reality of teenagers:

“I used the Island of Temptations, and on the island of temptations a series of stereotypes are represented. There is a classification, an incredible segregation and, of course, I used maybe a certain joke or something, I don’t know what, to get their attention. Obviously, always emphasising in the background ‘you know this isn’t good’ or ‘what do you think?’ at the end of the class. There is always a little debate. Even if you know your class has this tendency, you might show them an image or an idea to get their attention, but then always demystifying it.”

(ESC1.2)

Taken together, these excerpts illustrate how some trainee teachers adopt innovative and context-sensitive strategies to address sexism by drawing on media content familiar to students. This approach reflects an emerging pedagogical awareness that seeks to combine ethical education with critical media literacy, fostering reflection rather than mere prohibition.

5.3. Role of Institutions in the Fight Against Sexism: Centres and Teaching Materials

Teachers also expressed the usefulness of teaching materials. Trainee teachers did not have a strong opinion on the effectiveness of teaching materials, as most of them prepared their own materials. The most widespread opinion among senior teachers was that teaching materials allow for the expansion of knowledge about the role of women in science, although their implementation is somewhat clumsy because this representation is often limited to short stories at the beginning of the topics, and they feel they must supplement them, which is sometimes complicated given the lack of official training for teachers in this area:

“In the Anaya publishing house, at the beginning of each unit there is an enjoyable and simple reading about a female scientist who contributed to the study of that topic. It often happens that she died without due recognition.”

(ESC2.4)

“You know what happens, when we mention scientists, we talk about history. And the fact that women are represented in society, unfortunately, only goes back ten years at most. So, books sometimes try to include them, but often it is up to us to provide the data through our own research.”

(ESC2.5)

Taken together, these excerpts suggest that while teaching materials increasingly attempt to include female scientific figures, such inclusion often remains superficial and fragmented. Senior teachers perceive a gap between symbolic representation and meaningful integration, which requires additional effort on their part and highlights the limitations of current curricular materials in addressing gender inequality. Studies such as that by Diogo et al. (2023) describe how the diversity problem continues today, as the figures chosen as relevant in the history of science have historically been men. This means that female figures have been excluded from scientific discourse despite their contributions to science, revealing a sexist filter in what is considered relevant to science.

These findings align with previous research highlighting the persistent underrepresentation of women in scientific narratives. The teachers’ accounts reinforce the idea that curricular content continues to reflect historically male-centered conceptions of scientific relevance, thereby reproducing structural gender biases within educational materials.

In addition to the efforts that teachers may make in their profession within the classroom, the effect of the environment created in schools must be considered, as these are an important means of socialisation and interaction for adolescents (Gajda et al. 2022). Thus, senior teachers commented in interviews on the presence of resources provided in the school environment that made women in science visible, usually accompanied by information about the sexism they were subjected to in their time:

“We have a couple of people here who are in charge of this topic, and at least once a year, there is a course, a talk, or an exhibition. We are not directly trained, but when we call in a speaker to explain something to the students, we are also there. We have current topics that we try to cover every year: we think it is interesting for children to learn about sexuality. In addition, the people in charge here are responsible for training the teaching staff.”

(ESC2.5)

“They are in the book and, in addition, the Granada City Council, as part of its activities, always chooses talks on gynaecology. And the guy who has come the last few times is always very open to questions, so that workshop is great. In addition, the last part of the book on this topic is very much about bioethics, and he usually explains it very well.”

(ESC2.5)

From an interpretative perspective, these responses reflect an institutional approach that relies heavily on external resources and occasional activities to address sexism and gender-related issues. While such initiatives contribute to visibility and awareness, teachers’ accounts suggest that institutional responsibility for systematic staff training remains limited. From the perspective of trainee teachers, however, two very different points are mentioned during the interviews. On the one hand, some schools did adapt the environment to make it more equal, while others maintained predominantly male representations of important figures in the history of science:

“I don’t know about my subject, but it is true that in the subject in general that has been taught at this school, women in science have been used a lot as representations. They have work done by the students hanging in all the corridors. On both 25 November and 8 March, things are done for and by science and women or similar. It doesn’t have to be just science, it can also be writing. They also have art…”

(ESC1.1)

“No, in fact, when you looked at the classroom, most of the images, posters and such were all men. And when someone came to the orientation sessions, they told us that most of the photos on the posters were of men.”

(ESC1.5)

Taken together, these excerpts illustrate significant variability between educational centres in how gender equality is visually and symbolically represented. Such differences suggest that institutional commitment plays a decisive role in shaping school environments, potentially reinforcing or challenging sexist norms through everyday visual and cultural cues.

Overall, the findings of this section suggest that while teaching materials and institutional initiatives contribute to making women and gender inequality more visible in educational contexts, their impact largely depends on the level of institutional commitment and teacher involvement. The persistence of superficial representations and uneven implementation across centres highlights the need for more coherent, sustained, and structurally supported approaches to combating sexism within schools.

6. Conclusions

These findings should be interpreted within the specific cultural and institutional context of secondary education in Granada, Spain, and may not be directly transferable to other educational systems without contextual adaptation.

The findings of this exploratory study suggest that participating teachers reported being able to identify certain forms of sexism and gender stereotypes in the classroom. Both senior teachers and trainee teachers showed an ability to identify sexist behaviour and the underlying problems. However, there is a distinction in the justification of these sexist behaviours since, although both groups agree that the basis of these behaviours is unrelated to the gender of the people who display them, it is the group of trainee teachers who tend to associate these behaviours more with immaturity than with the contexts of the individuals. From these accounts, it appears that some teachers adopt a shared interpretative framework to explain adolescent behaviour, which, although influenced by individual circumstances, may lead to generalized interpretations in classroom practice. These findings highlight how teachers’ interpretations of sexist behaviour are closely linked to their self-assessed level of training, shaping the ways in which such behaviours are addressed in the classroom. Despite this precept, most participants in both groups rated their training as insufficient. During the interviews, participants mentioned some resources and tools offered by education centres and mediating institutions that could be of interest for obtaining specific training on sexism, but only a few found this material sufficient to perform their teaching duties correctly. This lack of training means that senior teachers in particular interpret the motives behind sexist behaviour in the classroom based solely on their experience. This finding highlights the importance of strengthening teacher training on these issues, as suggested by previous studies, in order to better support teachers in addressing sexism across academic, ethical, and moral dimensions (Gajda et al. 2022; Heras-Sevilla et al. 2021; Sanger and Osguthorpe 2013; Walker and Gleaves 2016). In this sense, teacher training emerges not only as a technical requirement, but as a key element shaping teachers’ ethical positioning and moral responsibility when addressing sexism in educational settings.

This point is related, in turn, to teachers’ perceptions of the teaching materials and resources available at the school. Most trainee teachers stated in interviews that, despite recognising the integrative intention of the content used in the teaching materials, on many occasions this was insufficient and they had to contribute from their own knowledge. This perception of limitations in training on sexism in teaching materials is shared by other teachers and has also been noted in previous studies such as that by Diogo et al. (2023). This is a cause for concern, as few teachers have specific training in the field of sexism in education and, of those who do not have this training, some are unwilling to become more involved, considering it outside their duties as teachers (Heras-Sevilla et al. 2021; Walker and Gleaves 2016). This situation underscores the importance of the capacity of teachers, schools, and educational institutions to provide not only safe environments for the personal and professional development of women, but also educational resources that promote science education—particularly in biology and geology—that recognizes the contributions of women and actively challenges sexist stereotypes embedded in the history of science (Walker and Gleaves 2016).

As an exploratory qualitative study, this research has several limitations that should be acknowledged. The research focuses on the perception of sexism, considering cisgender heterosexual women as the main affected population group. For this research to be more relevant to the population, aspects derived from discrimination suffered by non-binary people, transgender people, and sexual diversity should also be studied. Also, with an increase in participants, the effect of gender and the origin of the participants could be taken into consideration.

Considering the above, in future research, it would be interesting to expand this study by integrating dimensions that consider gender diversity beyond cisgender men and women. Furthermore, expanding the sample to include a broader and more diverse group of senior teachers across different subjects and educational contexts would allow for a more comprehensive understanding of the paradigms guiding teachers’ moral education practices. Future research may build on these qualitative findings by incorporating larger samples or mixed-method designs, such as follow-up surveys, to examine the prevalence of the themes identified in this study across broader educational contexts.