MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310555710 · doi:10.1177/19427751221137926

If Teaching Is a Female Dominated Profession, Why Are So Few Leading the Profession?

2022· article· en· W4310555710 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Samira ElAtia, Leticia Nadler Gomez, Elissa Corsi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Research on Leadership Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTransformational leadershipPublic relationsBalance (ability)Educational leadershipPolitical scienceField (mathematics)Medical educationHigher educationPedagogySociologyPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the teaching profession is dominated by women in Canada, they are still under-represented in the top leadership roles in the education system. This study highlights the current situation in Alberta, examines the barriers to women progressing to the top positions in the field of education and presents the most recurrent suggestions as found in the literature. Such suggestions include, organizations taking an intersectional approach to recruitment, training, pay, and promotions; organizations recognizing the importance of healthy career-life balance for its teachers; existing leaders applying transformational leadership to help new and prospective leaders; and institutions establishing mentoring programs.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Other designhigh
grokno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Not applicablehigh
opusno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Other designmedium
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.380
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.419
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.087 · 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

Labeled directly by 3 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designOther design · Not applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Research on Leadership EducationSame topicGender Diversity and InequalityFrench-language works237,207