{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02258064516129032, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0032258064516129032, 'mean_word_length': 5.267676767676767, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A gendered curriculum? An investigation of some aspects of curriculum provision in post‐primary schools

This paper examines the popular perception of the relationship between achievement and gender, a perception usually summarised in the phrase "the underachievement of boys". It suggests that this rhetoric masks another significant gender difference in education that of the gendered curriculum. A significant amount of research has been carried out on the over-representation of boys or girls in the take-up of various subjects in post-primary schools, using examination entries and results as a data set (e.g. Hannan, Breen, Murphy, Watson, Hardiman and O'Higgins, 1983). The research in this paper draws on the provision in the junior cycle or lower secondary curriculum of those subjects not normally included in the certificate examinations Religious Education, Physical Education and Social, Personal and Health Education. The comparison between the provision of these subjects in single-sex schools is the focus of the analysis and commentary. The review of the literature provides an insight into the many strands of the gender and achievement debate and offers a framework for the analysis of the data and subsequent commentary.