Bibliographic record
Abstract
WOMEN'S COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT Kristen A. Renn Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014 Women's education is a complex and urgent matter as it relates to global gender equity and is necessary for improving societies, argues Kristen A. Renn, in her book, Women's Colleges & Universities in a Global Context. Renn investigates the role that women's colleges and universities play in the twenty-first century, using on-site studies of thirteen schools in ten countries worldwide including Australia, Canada, China, India, Italy, Japan, Kenya, South Korea, the United Arab Emirates, and the United Kingdom. In her analysis, Renn identifies five roles that women's colleges and universities play contemporarily. They are (1) providing access, (2) campus climate, (3) leadership development, (4) gender empowerment, and (5) symbolism and paradox. Renn utilizes a vertical case study, in which she compiles data from all levels of the institution and provides a variety of methodological approaches including interviews and focus groups with students, faculty, and administration; data such as documents and websites; and informal observations of and participation in campus life. By utilizing this approach, Renn paints a rich picture of women's colleges and universities globally, engaging in a productive discussion of the commonalities and differences of each role/theme across institutions. In clear and accessible chapters on each role/theme, Renn success fully makes the claim of the importance of women's colleges and universities, as well as the complexities and contradictions that emerge in these spaces. First, she argues that these spaces provide access to women who may not otherwise have a chance to attend school and also provide financial and academic access to certain types of education, for example in fields not typically dominated by women, such as science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Secondly, womens colleges and universities provide welcoming campus climates where students are taken seriously by their teachers, potentially have more space to speak up, and are not minorities in traditionally male-dominated disciplines. In the third role, these spaces provide students with more opportunities for leadership on campus in student governments, publications, sports, and public services in ways that some women may not have access to in co-educational institutions. Renn also argues that womens colleges and universities make intellectual, cultural, and activist contributions to womens movements, which contribute to women's empowerment globally. …
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".