CAN FEMINIST CRITIQUE OF SCIENCE AND SCIENCE EDUCATION BE OF RELEVANCE FOR GENDER AND SCIENCE PROJECTS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES?

Beauvoir In most parts of the world boys outnumber the girls in science education. Both in the developed and in the developing world girls tend to choose other subjects than science (especially physics) when given a choice. The last 10 years developing and lending institutions have focused an increasing amount of money towards support and lending to girls education. There seems to be a consensus among aid organisations and donors that supporting development of science education for girls will increase and accelerate development. How science education should be carried out in order to reach this end is seldom discussed by the donors and development agencies. Science education in most developing countries is still very influenced by the former colonial power. It is very theoretical and instrumental and of very little relevance to the pupils lives. Thus it can be questioned whether this science education is suited to reach the aims of the donors and moneylenders supporting it. Extensive theory building has been conducted concerning the effect of science education for girls in developing countries. This paper question whether the feminist critique of science can be relevant to the discussion of how science education should be carried out in order to be attractive to girls. In this paper I present briefly how some donors and moneylenders in the west legitimise the support to gender and education projects in developing countries through their policy documents. I present different types of feminist critique of science as it has developed over the last 30 to 40 years. I then show the possible impact of the different critique on science education for girls. On this basis I question whether any of this critique can be relevant in terms of improving science education for girls in developing countries and meet the expectations of the donors that is expressed in their policy documents