MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1729319491 · doi:10.47678/cjhe.v31i1.183377

Patterns of Women's Enrolment in University Mathematics, Engineering and Computer Science in Canada, 1972-1995

2001· article· en· W1729319491 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Tahany M. Gadalla

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Higher Education · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian StudiesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGender equityEquity (law)Women in scienceDisciplineScience and engineeringRepresentation (politics)SociologySocial scienceEngineering ethicsPolitical scienceGender studiesEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efforts to ensure equity for women in scientific and technological disciplines must precede, or at least accompany, efforts to persuade them to pursue these studies. To achieve gender equity in these disciplines, factors discouraging women from full participation in them should be removed. Many psychological, sociological and institutional factors have been identified as contributors to the under-representation of women in these fields. For the aim of understanding and appraising these factors, this study offers a factual characterization of women's enrolment levels in mathematics, engineering, and computer science in Canadian universities and the change in these levels over the period 1972 to 1995. Findings indicate that patterns of women's enrolment in these three dis- ciplines are vastly different, a fact which suggests that factors specific to each discipline interact with and modify the effects of the more general sociological and psychological obstacles impeding women's participa- tion in them.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations14
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Higher EducationSame topicCareer Development and DiversityFrench-language works237,207