A University of Cambridge study has found that women scientists are almost entirely missing from compulsory science learning materials used by UK exam boards, a gap the researchers say may help explain why fewer girls continue with some STEM subjects after GCSEs. The analysis covered the UK’s six main exam boards across science specifications and found only one woman among 86 scientists named at Key Stage 4, and just three women among 181 scientists named at Key Stage 5.
Key facts
- The study analysed specifications from the UK’s six main exam boards across biology, chemistry, environmental science, geology, physics and astronomy.
- At Key Stage 4, 86 scientists were mentioned, but only Rosalind Franklin was a woman.
- At Key Stage 5, 181 scientists were mentioned and only three were women: Rosalind Franklin, Marie Tharp and Inge Lehman.
- The researchers say minor changes to existing specifications could add women scientists without major disruption to teaching frameworks.
- The paper was published in the British Educational Research Journal and also points to a correlation between exposure to female scientists at KS4 and girls’ later STEM choices.
What does this mean for students and schools?
For GCSE and A-level science students, the finding means the people behind many of the subject’s biggest breakthroughs are often not part of the required curriculum narrative. The Cambridge team argues that this matters most at the point when students decide whether to keep studying physics, maths and related subjects, because that is where the gender gap widens.
The researchers say the omission is not unavoidable: they identify places in existing specifications where women scientists’ contributions could be included with relatively small changes. Their examples include Rosalind Franklin in biology, Marie Skłodowska-Curie in KS4 chemistry, Lise Meitner in KS4 physics and Dorothy Hodgkin in KS5 biology. They also say teachers currently carry much of the burden of adding these stories in class rather than seeing them in the compulsory material itself.
- KS4 covers GCSE and equivalent qualifications.
- KS5 covers A-level and equivalent qualifications.
- The study focuses on science subjects including biology, chemistry, physics and astronomy.
Why do the researchers think the omission matters?
The team says the gender imbalance in specifications reflects the historical dominance of men in science, even though women made important contributions to major discoveries. In their view, that lack of recognition can shape who students imagine belongs in science, especially when schools are deciding which subjects pupils will continue with at 16 and beyond.
They describe the link between women’s visibility at KS4 and girls’ later subject choices as “compelling”, while also noting that under-representation in STEM is caused by many factors. Still, they argue the transition between KS4 and KS5 appears to be a critical point for retention, especially in physics and mathematics, where boys have higher uptake.
Which women scientists do the study recommend adding?
Among the names highlighted are Marie Skłodowska-Curie, whose work included the discovery of polonium and radium and who coined the term “radioactivity”; Lise Meitner, who helped explain nuclear fission; and Dorothy Hodgkin, whose X-ray crystallography work helped determine the structures of biologically important proteins such as insulin. The researchers also say Rosalind Franklin should appear in all biology specifications.
For KS5, the study says the work of Marie Tharp and Inge Lehman already appears in some specifications, but women remain a tiny minority among named scientists overall. The authors argue that broader inclusion would better reflect how modern science was built and would give students more relatable role models.
What happens next?
The Cambridge team says it has also built an app to display the study’s data. It is now preparing a follow-up paper on how teachers bring scientists’ stories into the classroom, and it has invited teachers to take part in a survey that will inform that research.
