MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995557072 · doi:10.22230/ijepl.2019v15n15a890

Gender Differences in Academic Achievement in Saudi Arabia: A Wake-Up Call to Educational Leaders

2019· article· en· W2995557072 on OpenAlex
Abdourahmane Barry

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Education Policy and Leadership · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSchool Choice and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcademic achievementEducational attainmentEquity (law)Value (mathematics)Educational equitySubject (documents)PsychologyGender equitySample (material)Mathematics educationMedical educationPedagogyPolitical scienceSociologyGender studiesMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Educational leaders must consider equity in education as a priority to make sure all students receive the best education possible. Studies on this topic in Saudi Arabia, however, are still in the embryonic stage. This article, thus, examines whether significant differences in academic achievement exist between male and female students based on gender, subject value, and expectations of education attainment. From a sample study of 3,759 students, the findings showed that female outperformed male students in both math, science, and their domains. Further, the more students value a subject or expect to go far in their education, the higher the score for both students, but female still outperformed male students. Educational leaders should considerthese findings a wake-up call to the persistent academic achievement disparities.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.200
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.226 · 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