Bibliographic record
Abstract
The existing number of women teachers - particularly in the pre-primary and primary levels - is a significant phenomenon. Many countries like: Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom are denoting that women represent a significant majority of the teaching workforce. An increased number of female teachers in the teaching profession are often associated with education systems. To explore the issue of feminization as it relates to the practice of education the Commonwealth Secretariat and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, with support from the Commonwealth of Learning, launched a study encompassing five countries. It explores about feminization from a variety of perspectives that have dominated much of the discourse on the role of women teachers within expanding education systems, particularly within primary education provision. Four of the countries -Dominica, Lesotho, Samoa and Sri Lanka - have a majority of women teachers in their teaching workforce. In the case of India, the study focuses on the contrasting state-level experiences of Kerala and Rajasthan; Kerala is known for the high percentage of female teachers in its workforce, whereas, in Rajasthan, female teachers are few. The study analyses issues through a broader view on gender equity as it pertains not just to education, but also to employment and women's rights and empowerment more generally. This multi-country analysis explores core similarities and differences among the five countries. In Sri Lanka and the Indian state of Kerala, high female teacher numbers have existed since independence, while in other countries the issue is recent. Further, one of the starting points of high feminization lies in the enrolments of teacher trainees at entry points into the teaching profession, and appears to be based more on choice. Overall the initial implication is that comparably, more women than men apply or ‘choose’ to become teachers. It seems that there is also a perception that some women were confined to teaching due to no other alternative. Women also professed a love for the profession and a desire to work with small children. It is generally easier to secure employment in teaching than other professions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.003 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".