MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414252911 · doi:10.1002/sce.70016

A Manifesto for Critical‐Feminist Science Education

2025· article· en· W4414252911 on OpenAlexaff
Katerina Pia Günter, Rie Hjørnegaard Malm, Sarah El Halwany, Elena Vasiliou, Aswathy Raveendran, Tatiane Russo‐Tait, Sara Tolbert

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsFrancophone University Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScience educationScholarshipPraxisScience, technology, society and environment educationFeminismSocial science educationFeminist philosophyScience studiesManifestoHigher education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Feminist science education is not a new endeavor but part of a long‐standing intergenerational struggle against exclusion, marginalization, and epistemic violence within science and science education institutions and practices. Despite decades of critical feminist scholarship and activism, science and science education continue to operate through patriarchal, colonial, and neoliberal structures that uphold cisheteronormativity, racism, and ableism, often under the guise of objectivity, neutrality, or equity. This special theme calls for a radical reimagining of science education through feminist praxis that is intersectional, transdisciplinary, and transnational. Drawing on foundational feminist scholars and feminist and critical science education researchers, we center practices grounded in care, collectivity, community, relations, dissensual engagement, and the co‐construction of knowledge that challenges dominant norms. We advocate for science education that foregrounds relational ethics, joy, and critical consciousness, and that supports students and educators in becoming agents of collective social transformation. This theme emerges from a geographically and generationally diverse, interdisciplinary community of feminist scholars committed to confronting the limitations of diversity rhetoric and pushing beyond representational politics. We critique extractive and damage‐based research paradigms and instead invite contributions that make visible “little justices,” resist neoliberal resilience discourses, and imagine feminist kin‐making across borders. We aim to create brave, caring spaces that resist censorship and silencing, especially of scholars whose work engages explicitly with questions of power and oppression. In doing so, we continue the legacy of feminist science education as a field that not only questions how science is taught and by whom, but that redefines what science education can be—politically, pedagogically, and imaginatively. Inspired by bell hook's thoughts, this special theme is an invitation to rethink how we think, teach, write, and speak about science and science education, and to collaboratively construct more just and inclusive futures in and through science.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.019
Scholarly communication0.0140.007
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0040.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.374 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience EducationSame topicCareer Development and DiversityFrench-language works237,207