MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1510625601

Obstacles to Gender Parity in Engineering Education

2008· article· en· W1510625601 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marta Rohatynskyj, Valerie Davidson, Warren Stiver, Maren M. A. Hayward

Notice bibliographique

RevueForum on public policy · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueCareer Development and Diversity
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésNarrativeCornerstoneDisadvantagedGender studiesContext (archaeology)Engineering educationSociologyPolitical scienceLawHistory
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction Traditionally low enrolment rates of women in engineering programs in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom and the European Union have been accounted for by what can be termed a Western women in engineering meta-narrative. Borrowing and paraphrasing Englund and Leach's (2000:126) definition growing out of the critique of modernity as a basis for the interpretation of local meanings, a meta-narrative constitutes a set of assumptions about a given phenomenon only some of which may be enunciated in a given context. Numerous studies of women in engineering programs in the West thus imply all elements of this meta-narrative while perhaps foregrounding one or two. A cornerstone of this discourse is the assumption of the male-female duality and the identification of engineering as a =masculine profession' as a result of the identification of technology itself as masculine. A further dichotomy of a female orientation of caring and social involvement and a complementary male orientation of abstract and instrumental thought leads to a concern with the importance of gender in engineering pedagogy and an inevitable 'chilly' social climate for women in engineering programs. The solution to this disadvantaged position for women is seen as an increase in the proportion of women in the profession. Early literature talks about a 'critical mass' set at a particular percentage that would allow women to reshape their position and experience fewer career obstacles, although more recent writing has been more cautious (Etzkowitz et al 1994; 2000). Kantor's (1977; Gupta and Sharma 2003) concept of 'tokenism' seems to embody many of the features of the Western women in engineering meta-narrative. Although not discounting the importance of rates of women's enrolment in engineering programs as worthy of concern, the comparison of these rates is itself problematical. It is especially suspect outside of the Western countries in which the meta-narrative evolved. The problem is a familiar one and one that Englund and Leach (2000) address within the context of ethnography. The problem lies in uncovering the variability that similar rates of enrolment conceal within different cultural and historical contexts. For example, it may be asked of two diverse national settings what combination of factors have come together to result in similar rates and what local meanings account for them? Thus the tension between modernist interpretations and local particularities surfaces in the problem of women in engineering globally, as well. The disentanglement of imposed assumptions from empirical realities is particularly crucial in this case as policy initiatives on the part of professional organizations, development bodies and governments must be tuned to effective management. The parachuting of a Western developed women in engineering meta-narrative into non-Western settings would result in the same kind of dissatisfaction and frustration witnessed in response to the parachuting of the gender and development discourse into vastly different cultural settings internationally (Cornwall, Harrison and Whitehead 2004). The complexities of preparing for comparison involve a number of considerations. First among them is the evolution of gender studies in general to encompass a relativization of both male and female, to include studies of masculinities. This is witnessed not only in the focus on maleness cross culturally (Connell 1995) but also in the growing feminist critique of an exclusive focus on women in development in general (Cornwall 2000; Chant and Gutman 2005). Secondly, social science theory has moved to a study of process as underlying social identities characterized by the inclusion of theoretical works in gender studies that render gender as performance and not a fixed attribute of the individual (Bourdieu 1977; Foucault 1978; Butler 1993). Gender is currently understood as contextually and historically contingent, culturally constructed and performed. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,022
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,074

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,015
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,009
Communication savante0,0060,004
Science ouverte0,0010,007
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0220,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,053
Tête enseignante GPT0,298
Écart entre enseignants0,245 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueForum on public policyMême sujetCareer Development and DiversityTravaux en français237 207