Religiosity and conservatism rank the boards differently
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa runs the most religiously saturated curriculum of the scored boards and simultaneously the most open historical narrative — it names its own generals' overreach, prints the 1971 prisoner figure, and treats Kargil as a loss of face. Punjab measures as less religious and more closed, more militarised and more hostile toward Hindus and India.
The two indices pull in opposite directions, and the same board sits at opposite ends of each. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa records the highest religious saturation of the scored boards — yet its Pakistan Studies names its own generals' overreach, prints the 1971 prisoner figure and treats Kargil as a loss of face. Punjab measures less religious on the same scale and is simultaneously more closed, more militarised and more hostile toward Hindus and India. Whichever single ranking you build, one of those two facts has to be suppressed to make it work — which is the argument for not building one.
What this rests on
This finding is not a reading of one passage. It is a property of the corpus as a whole, computed from the two composite indices, computed over every scored English-medium book. There is no single page to quote, which is why none is quoted here.
Limits
Being religious and being conservative are separate measurable properties here, and they vary independently. Any single ranking that merges them will mislead.
Boards and confidence
PunjabSindhKhyber Pakhtunkhwa high confidence
Confidence reflects the evidence tier this rests on. High means native or English-medium text verified by exact string match; medium means it depends partly on Urdu-medium material read at theme grade, or on an absence. See the method.
Source
The secularity and conservatism indices, computed over every scored English-medium book in the corpus
Cite this finding
Two citations are appropriate here, not one. The line above cites this finding. If you are quoting the textbook passage itself, cite the book — its full bibliographic record, edition and approval reference is on its own page, linked from each evidence entry above — and say that you found it here.
Challenge this finding
This is a claim about a printed book, so it is checkable, and it should be checked. If the citation is wrong, the edition is misidentified, the passage is quoted unfairly, or the finding does not survive its own evidence, that is worth reporting and it will be acted on whether or not the correction is convenient for the argument. Corrections are logged publicly in the corrections log; this applies fully to the boards themselves.