MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2585012709 · doi:10.18260/1-2--20162

Changing Gender Perceptions in Elementary STEM Education

2020· article· en· W2585012709 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emily Marasco, Laleh Behjat

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionMathematics educationWomen in sciencePsychologySociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The enrollment of women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) continues to be a problem across most post-secondary institutions in North America.In 2009, American universities reported 17.9% female enrollment in engineering 1 , while Canadian universities reported 17.7% in 2010 2 .While concerns around enrollment encompass numerous issues, many students, particularly females, lose interest in STEM domains as early as grades 4/5/6 3,4,5 .In this paper, we demonstrate how integrating STEM classroom content and crosscurricular aspects using creative, engineering design techniques can change student perceptions of gender within STEM fields.We designed a series of creative projects that combine mandated science, mathematics, technology, English, social studies, physical education and fine arts courses with basic electrical engineering concepts.These projects were led across five schools by one of the female researchers 6 .Over 350 local grade 5 students participated in the projects.Impressions held by students towards STEM were measured through quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews, both before and after the completion of the projects.These results are summarized in Table I.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEngineering Education and Curriculum DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207