Bibliographic record
Abstract
The moulds of masculinity and femininity determined by society are not only determinants of the way in which individuals behave in society, but also determinants of the production and distribution of the resources. The steady development of societies can be achieved when men and women have the equal power with equal opportunities and resources to shape their own lives and to contribute to their families, societies and countries. The internationally recognized indicators of aforesaid gender mainstreaming are the areas of Economic Participation and Opportunity, Educational Attainment, Health and Survival, and Political Empowerment. In Turkey, even though the legal basis of equality of women and men in these areas have been strengthened through legislative regulations enforced, the need to overcome the obstacles women face when participating to social life as complete and equal individuals and taking all precautions for this is still ongoing. In this study, gender equality in the Turkish higher education system was examined. For this purpose, the schooling rates in higher education, employment rates and participation rates in decision making mechanisms in management of women were examined in the light of gender equality indicators. In this study, which was conducted by document reviewing among qualitative research methods, official websites and documents of international organizations and Turkish official institutions were examined in order to access reliable documents related to Turkish Higher Education and gender equality variables. The survey concluded that while the schooling rates in the Turkish higher education and employment rates of women are high, the proportion of female academicians decreased as the academic degrees increased and that the horizontal disintegration patterns between the scientific areas are more visible on the basis of sub-branches. Furthermore, it has been found out that women are not adequately represented in decision-making mechanisms, even though they provide the necessary conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".