MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969992377 · doi:10.20319/pijss.2019.52.252268

CHALLENGES OF GENDER MAINSTREAMING IN COLLABORATIVE TRANSNATIONAL RESEARCH

2019· article· en· W2969992377 on OpenAlexaffabout
Immaculée Mukashema, Nimo Bokore, Regine King, Abhar Rukh Husain, Susan McGrath

Bibliographic record

VenuePEOPLE International Journal of Social Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryYork UniversityCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGender mainstreamingSociologyPrivilege (computing)Public relationsNegotiationGeneral partnershipSocial workContext (archaeology)IndigenousGender studiesPolitical scienceSocial scienceGeographyGender equality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses some of the challenges of gender mainstreaming in the context of a Rwanda-Canada social research project. The study partnership includes a team of academics from the Social Sciences Department at the University of Rwanda and three Canadian universities which are Calgary, St.Thomas and York. The ultimate goal of the research project is to create knowledge that could be used to train social workers to respond appropriately to the complex social issues of post-genocide Rwanda. The research team started by documenting the current practice of social work by Rwandan social workers; it wanted to be sure to understand the influence of indigenous cultures and values in social work practices. Interviews were conducted with 19 social work practitioners in Huye and Gisagara Districts of the Southern Province of Rwanda. The findings about the above stated goal have been published elsewhere. However, the present paper is focusing on the challenges of gender mainstreaming which arose after the field work. In this transnational social research project, the research team realized that it had not adequately addressed the different socio-cultural values of the researchers, particularly their understanding of gender and gender equality. It was found that when research team members/collaborators have different geopolitical locations, gender equal collaboration can be difficult to achieve. The paper reflects on the importance of research collaborators, either locally or transnational, to practice self-reflexivity as they negotiate the issues of power and privilege to produce non-hierarchical and accountable knowledge. The paper suggests that research team members need to be open to discuss the construction of gender and gender equality in both the local and the global context of the research. This research is a reminder that engaging gender throughout the process of transnational social research is crucial to addressing gender equity in post-conflict contexts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEOPLE International Journal of Social SciencesSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207