Distance Education: A Women's Studies Perspective
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper critically explores the links between WomenA¢â¬â¢s Studies and distance education and questions whether this style of learning is compatible with feminist pedagogical goals. A review of the literature was conducted, primarily from a US and Canadian perspective, and the following are highlighted as key concerns to feminist educators: gender, technology, curriculum, and pedagogy. Significantly, the research suggests that distance education continually downplays the importance of a gender analysis despite the fact that women make up the majority of distance ed users. The research also reveals that feminist teachers are increasingly using their experiences working in distance education to expand upon how, when and where we teach WomenA¢â¬â¢s Studies and that techniques employed within distance ed could be usefully applied to in-class learning. This paper concludes with suggestions of how we might begin to bridge the gap between feminist pedagogy and distance education.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it