Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past two decades women have been gaining access to management and administrative positions in increasing numbers. In contrast, however, with their male colleagues they often lag behind and consequently have not risen to top management positions. This paper examines the career progress of women who graduated from a postsecondary Management Development for Women Program, including the challenges encountered and strategies used in advancing into and through management. Survey methodology and documents (i.e., formal end of course evaluations, informal feedback from students, instructors, and mentors) were used to collect data for the study. The scholarly literature with respect to organizational factors, and advantages and disadvantages of same sex and mixed educational programs was reviewed. Analysis indicates that completion of a same-gender Program appears to be associated with improvements in economic outcomes such as advancement into higher levels of management and higher income. It is clear, however, that while the impacts of career interruptions and socially produced and historically constructed perceptions of women's role in the workplace and society cannot be overcome entirely by any one aspect of the social structure, undoubtedly a same-gender educational program that facilitates discourse on systemic causes of women's oppression significantly improved these women's employment outcomes. Résumé Depuis les vingt dernières années, les femmes ont de plus en plus accès à des postes de gestion. Toutefois, contrairement à leurs collègues masculins, les femmes tardent à gravir les échelons jusqu'à la haute direction. Cet article examine l'avancement professionnel de femmes ayant diplômé d'un programme de formation à la gestion réservé aux femmes, y compris les défis rencontrés et les stratégies utilisées pour franchir les étapes vers la gestion. Les données relatives à notre étude proviennent de sondages et de divers documents (ex. évaluations de fin de cours, rétroaction informelle par les étudiantes, les personnes chargées de cours et accompagnatrices). Nous avons revu des articles scientifiques sur les facteurs organisationnels et les avantages et désavantages de programmes éducatifs mixtes et unisexes. Notre analyse montre que la complétion d'un programme deformation unisexe est synonyme de meilleures performances sur le plan économique, comme un meilleur avancement professionnel et un salaireplus élevé. Il est clair que l'interruption de carrière et les perceptions du rôle professionnel et social de la femme induites par la société et l'histoire ne peuvent être contrecarrées par aucun aspect de la structure sociale. Il n'en demeure pas mains cependant qu'un programme de formation unisexe, qui facilite le discours sur les causes systémiques de l'oppression des femmes, améliore de façon significative leurs chances d'avancement professionnel.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".