Abstract

abstract
Introduction and Rationale
Iran is a nation of profound cultural, geographical, and economic diversity, home to over eight million primary school students. These children, from the remote villages of Sistan and Baluchestan to the margins of Tehran and from the Turkish-speaking regions of Azerbaijan to the shores of the Persian Gulf, bring vastly different languages, lived experiences, and access to resources into the classroom. In this context, the social studies textbook for the sixth grade is intended to be a common national resource, shaping all students' image of society and sense of belonging. This study critically examines whether the textbook fulfills this role equitably or inadvertently widens the gap between the curriculum and the realities of millions of children. Activities such as "experience traveling to the shores of the Persian Gulf" for a landlocked student, or "prepare and introduce various types of seasonal clothing" for a child from a low-income family, are not minor oversights. They are symptomatic of a fundamental disconnect and raise essential questions about educational justice. This research is grounded in the premise that primary education is the most sensitive stage for forming social identity, values of justice, and critical thinking. As emphasized by UNESCO (2021), inequitable educational content reproduces social inequality from childhood. Prior research, both in Iran and internationally, confirms serious deficiencies in textbooks regarding cultural, gender, ethnic, economic, and geographical equity (e.g., Nisak et al., 2020; Pirizamaneh et al., 2023).
Theoretical Framework and Research Objectives
The study's framework synthesizes Nancy Fraser's (2009) theory of justice (redistribution, recognition, representation) and UNESCO's (2021) inclusive education principles. This yields four operational equity indicators: Equitable Access (no presumption of specific resources), Meaningful Participation, Cultural/Social Diversity, and Non-Discrimination. Guided by this, the research aimed to: 1) Identify instances of educational justice/injustice based on these indicators, 2) Analyze the concentration and distribution of injustices, and 3) Provide prioritized, actionable revision solutions.
Methodology
This research employed a qualitative content analysis method with an inductive approach. To ensure a systematic and deep thematic extraction, the analytical process was structured using the staged framework of open, axial, and selective coding (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008). This approach allowed themes to emerge directly from the data within the rigorous structure of the defined theoretical framework.
The research population was the entire content of the sixth-grade social studies textbook (2024-2025 edition). The unit of analysis was precisely defined to ensure comprehensiveness and reproducibility:
• Textual Unit: A paragraph conveying a complete educational idea.
• Visual Unit: Any image (photo, map, chart) along with its caption.
• Activity Unit: A complete, distinct instruction for a student task (in-class activity, group research, end-of-chapter exercise).
The analysis proceeded in three stages:
1. Open Coding: Each unit was scrutinized against the key question: "Which of the four equity indicators is relevant to this content?" Initial descriptive codes (e.g., "assumption of internet access," "emphasis on ethnic clothing") were extracted.
2. Axial Coding: Initial codes were grouped into broader conceptual categories based on thematic commonalities. The connection of each category to the theoretical framework was carefully examined.
3. Selective Coding: Core categories were finalized into two comprehensive sets: "Educational Equity Categories" and "Educational Injustice Categories," and their interrelationships were mapped.
Reliability and Validity
Two coders independently analyzed the material. The initial inter-coder agreement, measured by Cohen's Kappa, was 0.98. This high agreement is attributed to the analysis being guided by the pre-defined theoretical indicators. Remaining discrepancies (less than 5% of codes) were resolved through consensus discussion. Validity was strengthened through expert review (by two curriculum and equity specialists), comprehensive documentation of the analytical trail, and consistent use of the theoretical framework as the ultimate criterion for judgment.
Key Findings
1. Overall Distribution: Out of 106 analyzed components, 94 (88.68%) were categorized as promoting educational equity, while 12 (11.32%) constituted educational injustice.
2. Equity Categories: Six main themes promoting shared identity and universal values were identified. The dominant theme was "National Defense and Patriotism" (51.1%), followed by "Anti-Colonialism and Resistance" (12.8%), and "Social Skills and Friendship" (10.6%).
3. Injustice Categories: Four primary injustice themes emerged, all directly linked to the 'Access' indicator: Unequal access to educational resources (25%), unequal financial capability (16.7%), unequal geographical access to seas (33.3%), and unequal socio-geographic ability to travel (25%).
4. Distribution and Concentration of Injustice: The most critical finding was the extreme concentration of problems: By Content Type: 83.3% of injustices were located in practical activities and images, not in conceptual text. By Chapter: 66.7% of all injustices (8 out of 12) were concentrated in only three chapters: Chapter 8 (Our Clothing), Chapter 9 (Iran's Seas), and Chapter 10 (Iran and Neighbors). Seven other chapters contained no injustice components.
5. Severity and Correctability: Injustices were ranked based on "Impact Severity" (potential to create deprivation) and "Correctability" (ease of providing alternatives by teachers). Activities like "expecting travel to neighboring countries" or "online clothing shopping" were rated as high-severity due to their explicit emphasis on socioeconomic privilege and difficulty of mitigation.
Discussion and Conclusion
The findings reveal a dual reality. The textbook succeeds at the macro-discourse level, fostering shared identity and participation ("identity-based justice"). However, a major theory-practice gap exists at the operational level. The extreme concentration of "access" injustices in three chapters' activities shows the textbook stumbles in providing equitable pathways to learning, creating an "Unequal Utopia"—an idealized community with unequal experiential access. This prioritizes recognition over redistribution (Fraser, 2009). While the overall injustice rate (11.32%) is relatively low, the highly concentrated pattern is this study's key insight: the problem is not diffuse but targeted and correctable.
Practical Recommendations
Revisions should focus precisely on the identified core:
1. Revise activities in Chapters 8, 9, 10: Replace resource-dependent tasks with flexible, multi-option alternatives (e.g., "compare local clothing using images" vs. "online shopping").
2. Diversify visuals: Reflect Iran's geographic and ethnic diversity in images.
3. Provide a supplementary teacher's guide with localized activity alternatives.
4. Develop authoring guidelines based on the four equity indicators for future textbooks.
5. Establish a permanent equity review committee within the curriculum body for periodic audits.
Implementing these focused recommendations can bridge the value-practice gap, transforming the textbook into a genuinely inclusive resource where every child feels, "This lesson is for me, too."