A reflexive thematic analysis exploring the experiences of undergraduate women in STEM in Bangladesh
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
Abstract Globally, a significant gender gap is reported in the enrolment of women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). Bangladesh reports one of the lowest female stakeholder percentages in STEM but has increased demand for skilled STEM professionals. Therefore, this qualitative study explores the experiences of undergraduate women in STEM in Bangladesh. Seven female undergraduate students were recruited using purposeful sampling, and a semi-structured interview was conducted. Reflexive thematic analysis, along with a phenomenological approach, was utilized for data analysis to gain a better understanding of their experiences. The four key themes that emerged were the gendered nature of interactions, the impact of societal barriers, underrepresentation and role models, self-identity, and psychological outcomes. The findings suggested multiple factors like gender-biased interactions in classrooms, lack of access to STEM resources, and lack of female role models negatively impacted students’ academic experiences. Moreover, poor self-esteem in female students contributed to imposter syndrome and heightened career anxiety.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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