MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W282489851

Gender Inequity in Business Academia: Past and Present

2010· article· en· W282489851 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueForum on public policy · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueGender Diversity and Inequality
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSalaryPolitical scienceHigher educationPublic relationsLaw
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction In 1972 the Congress of the United States passed Title IX which prohibited sexual discrimination in education. Since that time, researchers have been evaluating the progress made to date in the effort to eliminate gender differences in the academic environment. Some progress has been made on this front; however, gender inequity continues to plague the university setting today with inequities ranging over schools, programs, and departments. In an effort to shed new light on current issues and see how issues have changed over time, this paper will do a longitudinal study of gender issues in the domestic and international university settings. An analysis will be done both at the Ph.D. program level looking at gender differences in degree participation and completion and in the university academic environment to investigate gender faculty salary differences by school type, rank, academic qualification, hiring situation, and teaching area over the 2001 to 2010 time period. The data for this study will pull from universities around the world using information from The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools in Business International (AACSB). AACSB International was founded in 1916 and is the longest serving global accrediting body for business schools that offer undergraduate, master's, and doctoral degrees in business and accounting. According to the AACSB website, the AACSB schools as of the year 2010 numbered 579 separate institutions that were represented in 35 different countries around the world. Of these 579 schools, seven percent were undergraduate institutions only, 8 percent were graduate only programs, and 85 percent of the universities conferred degrees at both the undergraduate and graduate level. The data in this sample is derived from two surveys submitted by AACSB members. Survey one is the AACSB International Business School Questionnaire (BSQ) and the second is the AACSB International Salary Survey (SS). Prior Research For much of the past four decades, researchers have looked at the gender equity issues in the college and university setting raising many different questions. Over this time equity issues at both the Ph.D. program level and the academic university/college settings have been identified. According to data from the Ph.D. Completion Project (2008), which was the largest analysis to date of data on doctoral students put out by the Council of Graduate Schools (CGS), degree completion rates vary substantially by gender, race/ethnicity, and citizenship. The project evaluated the data submitted by 24 universities in the U.S. and Canada on 19,000 students who entered Ph.D. programs in 1992-93 through 1997-98. The report showed that, after 10 years, the cumulative completion rates for men, whites, and international students are higher than those for women, other U.S. racial/ethnic groups, and domestic students, respectively. While women have worked to become a larger part of the university setting, the 2008 AACSB Business school faculty trends showed that overall women as of the end of year 20062007 made up approximately 27% of all full-time faculty in US based business institutions. When broken out by rank the 2007-2008 results showed the instructors with the highest percentage at 41.8% followed by assistant professor 36.4%, associate professor 26.7%, and full professor 15.1%. Females as a percentage of full-professors have generally stayed stagnant at the 15% level while looking at the same data from the 2004-2005 years. This research shows that while women have become a larger part of the university setting they appear to be so at the lower ranks. West and Curtis (2006) evaluate data primarily from the American Association of University Professors (AAUP)'s annual Faculty Compensation Survey (FCS) for the 2005-2006 academic year. Their research provided data on faculty gender equity that were specific and comparable for a wide range of college and university campuses, with the goal of invigorating collaborative discussions at the local level. …

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.

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)0,001
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: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,768
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,991

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
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 Opus0,115
Tête enseignante GPT0,348
Écart entre enseignants0,233 · 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