The Impact of Cultural Education on the Social Status of Women in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In ancient China (before 1949), most Chinese women were illiterate, inferior and humble. Main works of women were to raise children and took care of their family members. They did not have opportunities to accept education, did not have decision-making powers at home and were underprivileged in the whole society. But now, many women have the highest decision-making powers in their families, and also are active in the workplaces, they already won a half-piece of the sky from men. What changed the status of Chinese women over these years? Many factors, such as politics, economy, science and technologies etc., all play important roles, but education plays the key role in changing the social status of Chinese women. In this paper, we will emphasize on education, especially the higher education, which let more women have confidence to compete with men in the workplaces and families. We will discuss the changing process of the Chinese women’s social status and observe the role of education in this process. Then we will point out the problems and challenges that Chinese women are still facing, and give some proposals to further promote the development of women in future.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".