Women and Work: 50 Years of Change since the <i>American Women</i> Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[Excerpt] When the President?s Commission on the Status of Women published its report American Women in 1963, there was much to be celebrated with regards to women?s status in the United States. Women were living longer than ever and more of them were a part of the labor force than at most times in recent history. The civil rights movement had placed equal opportunity as the ideal in the workplace, at home, and in all facets of life. Yet in the workforce, women had a long way to go. Many jobs were essentially off-limits to women, including doctor, lawyer, and many types of businesses. While a few remarkable women pursued these fields, the majority of women worked as teachers, nurses, maids or secretaries. Fifty years later, women?s gains are considerable. More women are a part of our labor force than in 1963, and women are more likely to be the primary breadwinner for their families than they were then. Women are matriculating from higher education in larger numbers than their male peers. Many goals outlined in American Women have been achieved. But the more things change the more they also stay the same. This paper will examine women?s participation in the labor force, then and now, and illuminate lingering gender disparities that persist from day one for female workers. Specifically, a persistent concern is that women begin their careers nearly on par with their male counterparts in wages, but fall behind their male colleagues in mid- to late- career. This fact has not changed substantially since 1963, even though postsecondary educational gains have helped women narrow the wage gap. There is much left to be done to ensure the promise of the 1963 report of the President?s Commission on the Status of Women. This paper begins with a brief study of the changing landscape of education and training and its impact on women?s work. Next, the paper explores women in the workplace and persistent challenges they face. In addition, the paper examines women and their support for their families as wage earners. The paper concludes with an assessment of policy priorities to help achieve many of the goals set forth in the original American Women report.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".