Semester Offering: August
This course aims to examine the gender dimensions of science and implications from technological change. It asks a basic question: Are science and technologies gendered? The course first covers the debates around gender, science and technologies, then examines the relation between new technologies and gender through impacts, uses and responses. It ends with an interrogation about what science and changing technologies may mean for gender, and vice versa, in a future world.


The student on completion of this course would be able to:

      Compare and contrast debates on gender, science and technologies and thus assess the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches.
      Determine how the design of technologies can be a gendered process
      Identify the impacts of using new technologies using a gender analysis




I.         Context and debates
1.       Introduction: Debates on Feminist Science and Technology Studies
2.       Science, Sexuality and Gender

II.       Science and Technology: Impact, use and responses through a gender lens
1.       Gender, Technology and Employment in Asia
2.       Gender Digital Divide, ICTs and Cyberfeminism
3.       Genetic, Bio and Reproductive Technologies
4.       Gender and Technology: Women and Men in a Future World




1.    Saini, A. (2017), Inferior: How Science Got Women Wrong - and the New Research That's Rewriting the Story, Boston: Beacon Press.
2.    Fine, C., Delusions of Gender: How our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference, New York: Norton, 2010.
3.    Fox, M.F. et al. (eds.), Women, Gender and Technology, Urbana, Il: University of Illinois Press, 2006.


1.    DAW, Gender equality and empowerment of women through ICT, Women 2000 and Beyond, UNITED NATIONS, Division for the Advancement of Women, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, September 2005
2.    Harding, S., Sciences from Below: Feminisms, Postcolonialities and Modernities, Duke UP, 2008.
3.    Huyer, S. and Sikoska, T. (2003), Overcoming the Gender Digital Divide: Understanding ICTs and their Potential for the Empowerment of Women, INSTRAW Research Paper Series no. 1, April 2003
4.    Mitter, S. (2001) “Asia Women in the Digital Economy: Policies for Participation”, United Nations Development Programme, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
5.    Ng, C. and Mitter, S.i (eds), Gender and the Digital Economy: Perspective from the Developing World, New Delhi: Sage, 2005.
6.    Royal Tropical Institute (KIT) and Oxfam (2005), Gender and ICTs for Development:A global sourcebook,KIT Publishers and Oxfam GB.
7.    Wajcman, J. (1991), Feminism Confronts Technology, Cambridge: Polity Press.


  • Gender, Technology and Development (SAGE)
  • Gender, Work and Organization (Wiley)
  • Gender Medicine (Elsevier)
  • Feminist Economics (Taylor and Francis)
  • International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology


25 hours of lecture plus 10 hours of student presentation (equal to 5 lecture hours). Students are expected to spend at least 6 hours of self-study per week, including required readings.


Lectures (with powerpoint slides) with group presentations and student discussions. A course review session will be conducted prior to the final exam.


  • One article review 20% (graded on: Abstract or quality of description and summary, Critical analysis, Coherence, References used, Writing skills);
  • one group presentation and student-led discussion 20% (graded on 1. Presentation: strength of the argument, critical content, coherence, verbal skills, 2. Moderating and facilitating discussions);
  • midsem exam 20% (closed book);
  • final exam 40% (entire content -close book).
In the exams, an “A” would be awarded if a student can contextualize the knowledge learned in class by presenting case studies from articles or news, and including required readings in their analysis. A “B” would be awarded if a student shows an overall understanding of all topics, a “C” would be awarded if a student meets below average expectation in terms of analysis, and a “D” would be awarded if a student does not meet basic expectations in analyzing or understanding the issues presented in the course.