MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2259879334 · doi:10.1515/rpp-2015-0037

Stages Of Gender Education In Canadian Secondary Schools

2015· article· en· W2259879334 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vasyl Zhukovskyi, О. О. Костюк

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative Professional Pedagogy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Roles and Identity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumGender equityEquity (law)Higher educationScope (computer science)Gender analysisPedagogyGender biasSociologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsPsychologyGender studiesSocial psychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The article deals with the issue of educational preconditions of gender education formation and development in Canadian secondary schools. On the basis of conducted scientific and pedagogical literature analysis it has been determined that gender education has undergone three main stages and is currently developing during its fourth, modern period. The research is focused on different aspects of gender education in Canadian schools, namely the objectives, principles, methods, content and means. The transformation dynamics of the aforementioned gender education dimensions at each stage has been examined. It has been concluded that the objectives of gender education in Canadian secondary schools have considerably evolved since 1960’s; the methods and means of teaching students about gender have become more versatile and relevant to the requirements of the present-day informational technology society; the content of gender education has extended its scope. The provision of gender education in secondary educational establishments in Canada has transformed from a haphazard “add women and stir” approach to a more consistent manner, which demands availability of certain policies (gender equity policy, anti-discrimination policy, safe schools policy) and codes of conduct in action at schools; integration of gender equity issues into different subject courses across the curriculum, as well as introducing separate fully-fledged courses, like “Women’s Studies”, “Men’s Studies”, “Gender Studies”.

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)0.002
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 score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0170.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.174
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComparative Professional PedagogySame topicGender Roles and Identity StudiesFrench-language works237,207