Gender Nonconforming Individuals and Business Education: A Systematic Review of the Literature
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
Our understanding of gender is evolving from a binary system to a continuum whereby gender is fluid, multifaceted, and individually defined or expressed. Businesses, through owners, employees, and customers, as well as company policies and practices, play a role in the acceptance and inclusion of gender nonconforming individuals. One group with a responsibility in relation to gender inclusion is the business education system—undergraduate and graduate business programs that deliver business curriculum, shape business practices, research business issues, and produce business leaders. The purpose of this study is to examine the peer-reviewed literature to identify if and how the interpretation of genders, one that includes gender nonconforming individuals, exists in business education research. While 17 articles were found that cover topics within this general area, an overall lack of academic literature examining business education and gender nonconformity may leave business educators ill-equipped to include gender nonconforming individuals and topics in their classrooms. This work may inform business educators regarding the status of business education in relation to the evolving understanding of gender and identify areas for future work to help ensure that business educators are equipped with the knowledge to enable full gender inclusion in the business classroom.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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