Teachers’ and leaders’ gendered beliefs and practices shape students’ learning experiences, yet Estonian schools lack systematic approaches to address these dynamics. This study aimed to explore teachers’ and school leadership team members’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘leaders’) gender beliefs and gender-related practices. The research questions were formulated as follows: How are gender beliefs manifested by teachers and school leadership team members? What kinds of gender-related practices in schools are mentioned by teachers and school leadership team members?

The conceptual framework draws on Deaux’s (1985) theory of the gender belief system, characterized as mental schemas shaped and reinforced through socialization (Whitley & Kite, 2010). This system integrates components such as gender stereotypes, gender role attitudes, personal beliefs about gender roles, the perceptions of individuals who violate these norms, gender identity and sexual orientation (Kite et al., 2023). Gender stereotypes are central to this framework, reflecting culturally shared assumptions (Whitley & Kite, 2010) that help determine perceived violations of gender norms (Kite et al., 2023). The study adopts Hyde et al.’s (2019) approach, defining gender as a flexible, multidimensional, and socially constructed concept extending beyond binary categories.

Focus group interviews with four teachers and four leadership team members from one school were conducted using a qualitative abductive research strategy and thematic analysis. The findings revealed themes on gender stereotypes, roles, transgender and gender-diverse students, sexual orientation, students’ interests, and gender-related practices in schools. Teachers and leaders held varying and sometimes contradictory gender beliefs, exhibiting both stereotypical views and awareness of biases. Moreover, they were open to dialogue, with some willing to adjust their views. While perceiving their schools as gender-supportive, they acknowledged broader gender inequality issues and practices.

Participants The study was conducted in one relatively large Estonian general education school located in an urban area catering to 7–18-year-old students. The authors employed convenience sampling in selecting the school (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). A total of eight members of the school staff showed interest in participating. Focus groups of teachers and leaders were formed. Data collection To ensure balanced discussions, the focus groups were conducted separately for the teachers and leaders in February 2024, ensuring balanced discussion and strict data confidentiality, adhering to the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ALLEA, 2023). The study used the Qualitative Attitude Approach (QAA) and vignettes to explore gender attitudes and beliefs. Within the QAA framework, attitudes are understood as internalized personal constructs relating individuals to social and cultural contexts (Autonen-Vaaraniemi, 2022; Vesala & Rantanen, 2007), and the vignettes were specifically designed using the Skilling and Stylianides (2020) framework. The interview plan consisted of background questions, eight QAA statements and three vignettes based on previous research on teachers’ gender beliefs, attitudes and practices (Gajda et al., 2022; Hyde, 2005; Meece et al., 2006), and some questions related to them. The interview plan was piloted with a group of master’s students (ed. sciences) who also worked in education, after which the interview plan was slightly improved. The focus group interviews were divided into two sessions: a QAA session where participants discussed individual written statements and a vignette session where participants read and discussed short stories based on guiding questions.The interviews, totaling 240 minutes, were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and anonymized. Data analysis The study used a qualitative abductive strategy (integrating inductive and deductive analysis) to identify discrepancies and knowledge gaps. Thematic analysis with the codebook approach was chosen for its flexibility. Data coding utilized QCAmap (Mayring & Fenzl, 2022). Initial codes emerged inductively from the data, grounded in participant perspectives. To ensure reliability, investigator triangulation involved two authors independently coding and developing the codebook through discussion. Deductive coding later refined the codebook using theoretical perspectives. Themes that emerged inductively included beliefs about students’ interests and gender-related practices in schools. Themes derived from deductive coding included gender stereotypes, gender roles, transgender and gender-diverse students and sexual orientation.

The aim of this study was to explore the gender beliefs and gender-related practices exhibited by teachers and members of school leadership teams. Regarding gender beliefs, the teachers held mixed views on cognitive and behavioral differences that ranged from beliefs in inherent biological distinctions to questioning the validity of such claims. Stereotypes about boys being inherently better at maths and girls at languages were widely recognized. The participants expressed a commitment to equal treatment yet described distinct behavioral patterns where boys externalized conflict and girls internalized it, while they emphasized their responsibility to support transgender and gender-diverse students despite potential parental opposition. Beliefs about sexual orientation revealed that gender nonconformity was frequently matched with homosexuality. Finally, while the teachers advocated for supporting individual student interests regardless of gender norms, they expressed uncertainty about how to effectively challenge stereotypes. Regarding gender-related practices, when talking about gendered learning opportunities, the participants described efforts to challenge outdated subject divides, although they acknowledged that peer pressure often causes students to hide their non-conforming interests. Teachers reported striving for equal engagement and welcoming feedback on biases, yet school leaders noted that boys still frequently receive more attention than girls. Co-education was the standard for them, but there are still instances of informal segregation in the classroom. Support for transgender and gender-diverse students included structural measures like gender-neutral facilities and the use of chosen names, yet challenges remained, illustrated by administrative conflicts over staff members refusing to use preferred names. While educators advocated for fair assessment, everyday practices continued to reinforce gender norms through the use of gendered language, behavioral expectations for girls, and school uniform policies. The findings highlight the need for school-wide coherence to address mixed beliefs, revealing knowledge gaps that hinder action and a persistent gap between inclusive intentions and everyday gendered practices.

ALLEA. (2023). The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (Revised ed.). Berlin: ALLEA. https://doi.org/10.26356/ECOC Autonen-Vaaraniemi, L. (2022). Family professionals attitudes and stance-taking on post-divorce fatherhood: a qualitative attitude approach. International Journal of Child, Youth and Family Studies, 13(1), 56-81. https://doi.org/10.18357/ijcyfs131202220658 Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. Deaux, K. (1985). The construction of gender stereotypes: A social-cognitive perspective. In A. H. Eagly (Ed.), Social psychology of gender (pp. 45-78). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Gajda, A., Bójko, A., & Stoecker, E. (2022). The vicious circle of stereotypes: Teachers’ awareness of and responses to students’ gender-stereotypical behaviour. PloS one, 17(6), e0269007. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269007 Hyde, J. S., Bigler, R. S., Joel, D., Tate, C. C., & van Anders, S. M. (2019). The future of sex and gender in psychology: five challenges to the gender binary. American Psychologist, 74(2), 171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000307 Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American psychologist, 60(6), 581. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.581 Kite, M. E., Whitley Jr, B. E., & Wagner, L. S. (2023). Psychology of prejudice and discrimination: Fourth Edition. Routledge. Mayring, P., & Fenzl, T. (2022). QCAmap (Version 2020) [Web application]. Verein zur Förderung Qualitativer Forschung – Association for Supporting Qualitative Research (ASQ). https://www.qcamap.org Meece, J. L., Glinke, B. & Burg, S. (2006). Gender and motivation. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 351-373. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.7 Skilling, K., & Stylianides, G. J. (2020). Using vignettes in educational research: a framework for vignette construction. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 43(5), 541-556. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2019.1704243 Vesala, K. M., & Rantanen, T. (Eds.). (2007). Argumentaatio ja tulkinta: Laadullisen asennetutkimuksen lähestymistapa. Gaudeamus. Whitley, B. E., Jr., & Kite, M. E. (2010). The psychology of prejudice and discrimination (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.