Less of a minority in university education in engineering? An intersectional analysis of female and male students in Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While engineering remains a male dominated university program in the industrialized world, in Canada the proportion of women enrolled in undergraduate engineering education has risen in some universities. Furthermore, the percentage of undergraduate female students varies considerably among engineering sub-disciplines. Considering three selected Canadian universities, each with a relatively high proportion of women in undergraduate engineering programs, this interdisciplinary mixed methods study first explains the rationale for its methodology, namely, an intersectional gendered research design drawing on the perspectives of female and male students and faculty members in various engineering sub-disciplines, and of administrators in the engineering programs. We then provide a feminist intersectional overview of the students’ personal backgrounds and of student life. The article concludes by highlighting the contributions made by our feminist intersectional analysis toward gaining a deeper understanding of the complex relationship between gender and contextual variables such as university and type of program with various indicators of the background and experiences of students in selected Canadian undergraduate engineering programs. Questions for further research about women as a minority among university students are also identified.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it