An absence of women scientists featured in UK exam board specifications for science could be a factor in the disproportionate number of girls dropping STEM subjects at 16, and contributing to the gender gap in STEM careers, new research from the University of Cambridge has found.
The study, which analysed the UK’s six main exam boards’ specifications across science subjects, found that out of 86 scientists mentioned at Key Stage 4 (KS4), which covers GCSE and equivalent, just one was a woman – Rosalind Franklin. And even then, Franklin – whose work on X-ray crystallography led to the discovery of the double helix structure of DNA – featured in only one specification.
The researchers – who looked at specifications for biology, chemistry, environmental science, geology, physics, and astronomy – say the analysis showed that several major scientific breakthroughs taught in UK specifications were made by women, but that these women are not explicitly included in the compulsory learning material. Instead, the onus is placed on individual teachers to highlight these achievements in the classroom.
Now, the Cambridge team – Dr Greg J Cooke, Skyla B White, and Stephanie Buttigieg, who collaborated with the IncludeHer movement – say minor, targeted, adjustments could incorporate these key contributions into existing teaching frameworks with minimal changes, including the accomplishments of Nobel Prize-winning female scientists. They say this additional content could inspire more girls to continue with STEM subjects, in particular physics and mathematics at Key Stage 5 (KS5) – which covers A-level and equivalent – and beyond.
Despite girls typically outperforming boys in the majority of STEM subjects at KS4, physics, mathematics, and further mathematics have a significantly higher uptake at KS5 among boys, with the percentage of girls choosing to study mathematics and further mathematics now lower than it was in 2005.
The researchers say they found a “compelling” correlation between the gender representation of scientists that students are exposed to at KS4 and the STEM subjects girls go on to choose to study at KS5.
The study – published in the British Educational Research Journal – showed that students experience a “saturation” of male scientists in compulsory physics learning materials at KS4, and suggests this could be an influence on the much lower number of girls who continue with the subject at KS5 compared to boys. By contrast, in biology and chemistry – subjects which are slightly more popular with girls than boys at KS5 – KS4 exam specifications feature fewer mentions of individual scientists overall.
While the researchers acknowledge that women’s under-representation in STEM arises from a set of complex factors, they say such a significant change in gender disparity between KS4 and KS5 suggests this transition point may be critical for retention. Pointing to the success increased exposure to relatable STEM role models has already had in shaping students’ perceptions of who science is for, they have identified specific places within the existing exam specifications where they say women scientists’ achievements can be incorporated relatively easily.
Among their recommendations, the researchers say Rosalind Franklin should be included in all biology specifications. Marie Skłodowska-Curie – who won two Nobel Prizes, discovered polonium and radium, and coined the term “radioactivity" – should be included in discussions around atomic structure and isotopes in KS4 chemistry, and Lise Meitner – a nuclear physicist who was involved in the discovery of nuclear fission, provided the first theoretical explanation of the process, but was controversially excluded from a Nobel Prize – would be an ideal role model for inclusion in KS4 physics.
Among recommendations for KS5 exam specifications, which the study also analysed and found that only three of the 181 scientists mentioned were women – Rosalind Franklin, geologist Marie Tharp, and seismologist Inge Lehman – the researchers argue that the work of Dorothy Hodgkin, who won a Nobel Prize for using X-ray crystallography to determine the structures of important, biologically relevant proteins such as insulin, would fit naturally into the study of protein structure in KS5 biology.
Dr Greg J Cooke said: “The women we recommend for the updated science specifications have helped shape the modern world. It is important that students understand the iterative history of science and the context behind these discoveries to frame their knowledge when assessing the bigger picture: How did Susan Solomon help save the ozone layer? How did Lise Meitner’s work eventually lead to the dawn of the nuclear age? It is long overdue that we teach these inspiring stories about women.”
Skyla B White said: “Despite years of effort to achieve gender parity in science, it is disappointing that students in the UK can complete their science education without learning the names of the women behind the scientific discoveries they study. This matters because it is at this stage, when students begin to choose which subjects to pursue further, that the gender divide grows. It’s fantastic that students learn about the Hertzsprung–Russell diagram, for example, but it was built on the work of Annie Jump Cannon, who is not mentioned. You can’t tell one story without the other.”
Stephanie Buttigieg said: “Research has shown that relatable role models can help keep more girls in STEM by strengthening their sense of belonging in science and fostering positive attitudes towards scientific careers. When school science specifications leave out women’s names, they miss a real opportunity to help girls see a future for themselves in science and continue to reinforce the harmful stereotype that science is mainly for men.”
Reference
Cooke, G J; White, S B; Buttigieg, S; Lowson, N; Galaudage, S; Battisti, A; Kelsey, L, and Ross, K (2026). The absence of women’s scientific contributions in core UK pre-university science qualifications. British Educational Research Journal, 00, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.70279
British Educational Research Journal
The absence of women’s scientific contributions in core UK pre-university science qualifications
22-Oct-2026