MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

“The farmer and her husband”: Engendering the curriculum in a Faculty of Agriculture in an Ethiopian university

2010· article· en· W1500224096 on OpenAlexaff
Claudia Mitchell, Derbew Belew, Adugna Debela, Sirawdink Fikreyesus

Bibliographic record

VenueAgenda · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersWorld Bank Group
KeywordsMainstreamGender mainstreamingCurriculumAgricultureMainstreamingHigher educationSociologyGender studiesEconomic growthGender relationsPolitical scienceFood securitySocial scienceGender equalityGeographyPedagogyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

abstract This focus piece comes out of a recognition that higher institutions can and must play a key role in transforming the gendered landscape of food security. Close to 70% of labour related to post-harvest in Ethiopia is carried out by women. However, this does not mean that decision-making in a family (about what to grow or how to market it) is determined by women, and it also does not mean that women have equal access (compared to men) to resources and to status more broadly. Alongside this analysis is a recognition that women are often left out of the development of new technologies that could change the nature of their labour. While clearly there is a need to mainstream gender in the curriculum of post-harvest in higher education institutions, the unique challenges facing universities (especially in Agriculture) remains an area that is under-studied, even though within the development literature more generally the idea of mainstreaming and integrating gender has had prominence at least for severa...

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0290.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.206 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgendaSame topicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207