Investigating Kurdish Women’s Experiences With Education in Kurdistan With Respect to Oppression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The following thesis provides a qualitative study that sought to answer the question: \nWhat do Kurdish women’s experiences reveal about women’s education in Kurdistan \nwith respect to oppression? The study was framed within a postcolonial feminist \nframework to investigate Kurdish women’s lived experiences within education in the \nKurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI). The study used feminist research methods to collect and \nanalyze data. Through purposeful sampling, 5 Kurdish women living in the KRI were \nrecruited and interviewed by the researcher through one-on-one, semi-structured \ninterviews. The researcher used an interpretive approach for data analysis to investigate \nparticipants’ experiences as women and as members of an ethnic minority. The study was \nconducted through a postcolonial feminist lens, which highlighted the unique social \ncategories in which Kurdish women find themselves. The study found that the women’s \nlived experiences were determined by the intersections of gender, ethnicity, religion, \nlocation, SES, and age, among other social categories. Such categories affect women’s \nquality of life, freedom, and education, as identified by the women themselves. Further, \nthe women identified the following factors acting as barriers that impede their equal \naccess to education and opportunities: gender norms, family, culture, distance, disability, \nlanguage, and conflict. The study also lays out how women make sense of and cope with \nsuch barriers and inequality, before concluding with recommendations for changes based \non participants’ knowledge and lived experiences.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".