MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2256234783

"Women Hold Up Half the Sky": An Old Chinese Proverb

2002· article· en· W2256234783 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cindy Chazan

Notice bibliographique

RevueSh'ma: A Journal of Jewish Ideas · 2002
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésJudaismDestiny (ISS module)FemininitySociologyMantraJewish studiesGender studiesPsychologyTheologyPhilosophyEngineering
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Igrew up in Montreal where family, day school, youth groups, summer camp, and Jewish Studies at McGill University were all interwoven threads of a Jewish life that circled around home. expected trajectory: do well in school, get married, create a Jewish home. Never thinking of myself as different, I fully expected to be part of that continuum. But mentors and circumstances intervened: Professor Ben Ravid, a Jewish History professor, pushed me to apply to the Hornstein Program at Brandeis University. There, Professor Bernard Reisman became a mentor and encouraged me to see that professional opportunities were limitless. Professor Ruth Wisse and Nahum Ravel modeled behavior of Jewish leadership and learning that I wanted to emulate. These mentors convinced me that no opportunities in the Jewish community would be barred to me because I was a woman, and they helped me strategize my future. Soon I moved into a male-dominated Jewish organizational culture where my predecessors had all been men and the top lay leaders determining my destiny were mostly men, as were my professional colleagues. At that time, women moving up the general corporate ladder dressed in manly suits, wore ties, and learned all the necessary skills and metaphors to make it in that world. The mantra became, Do anything possible to avoid accentuating a femininity that leads to being stereotyped. While I shared the same intensity and commitment to the job as my male colleagues and friends, I also brought to the workplace characteristics often associated with the way women lead — characteristics that had been previously undervalued or ridiculed, and that I hoped to turn into an honest advantage. This became obvious when I was appointed Executive of the Jewish Federation of I brought to the workplace characteristics often associated with the way women lead. Greater Hartford in 1992.1 believe I offered a needed compassion toward a community that had suffered severe economic setbacks, an annual campaign in free-fall, and despondent lay leaders and professionals. For example, instead of abandoning major donors who were unable to continue making highlevel gifts, I suggested we create a strategy that honored them for past generosity and worked with their As a result of maintaining these relationships, when their economic situations improved, they remembered and returned as donors. Initially I was criticized for being too nurturing — not businesslike. But the strategy worked. leadership style reflects the principles of other women leaders. I create strategies for the communities I serve by orchestrating relationships and creating inclusive rather than hierarchical environments. Shaping such work settings is labor intensive and can leave room for surprises. It also occasions the risk of appearing weak. There have been times when I wondered if my leadership was being scrutinized more closely because I am a woman. What do I need to do to ensure the community never regrets its unusual decision to hire a woman for my position? I share these doubts with many women executives in the corporate world. In addition to being a new executive, I was a new mother. Family came before my job — a statement I made public to both the search committee and the Federation Board. As concerned as I was about doing a good job, I was equally aware of the voices that said, My career is only part of my identity. Do right for your children. Above all, be a good parent. Being candid about these issues helped create a family-sensitive work environment that accepted as the norm taking a child to the doctor and leav-

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,522
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,644

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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 Opus0,032
Tête enseignante GPT0,283
Écart entre enseignants0,251 · 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 tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
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

Citations1
Publié2002
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueSh'ma: A Journal of Jewish IdeasMême sujetJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesTravaux en français237 207