MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406982945 · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-75301-5_2

Policy Context for Gender Equality Reforms in Education in Central Asia

2025· book-chapter· en· W4406982945 on OpenAlexaff
Naureen Durrani, Zumrad Kataeva, Aliya Kuzhabekova

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave studies in gender and education · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCentral asiaContext (archaeology)Gender equalityPolitical scienceDevelopment economicsGeographyGender studiesSociologyEconomicsPhysical geographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter conducts a comparative analysis of gender equality policies across the five Central Asian countries, focusing on gender equality in education and other spheres by synthesising insights from academic and grey literature. The chapter begins by outlining the historical policy landscape, examining how Soviet gender equality policies impacted women in Muslim Central Asia. It then analyses how the intricate interplay of the Soviet legacy, globalisation, neoliberalism, and nationalist discourses influence gender equality policies and identities. Subsequently, it explores post-independencegender equality frameworks and policies, considering key actors, international gender equality commitments, and policy structures within each Central Asian nation. Lastly, the chapter examines gender social norms viewed as the primary obstacle hindering the effectiveness of gender equality policies and endeavours in the region.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave studies in gender and educationSame topicGender Politics and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207