Talk:Socioeconomic impact of female education
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Socioeconomic impact of female education article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Rice University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2013 Fall term. Further details are available on the course page.|
Request for comment
- Actually, I would like to solicit comments from others, via this request for comment (RFC). I have no argument with anything you've written, and it's thoroughly sourced, but it reads as an essay rather than as a reference article. I've been generally curious about whether others consider articles like this to be advocacy pieces that fall under the topic of WP:NOTFORUM or whether they amount to WP:SYNTH. As I said, I have no gripe about the content of your article, just whether Wikipedia is a proper venue for it. —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:48, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- Somewhat against my will I am somewhat wont to agree with —Largo Plazo. On it's face, Female education and development as a concept isn't well defined in a manner which would allow it to be notable as an encyclopaedic topic. However, I could see this changing if it added content that might make it more relevant as a cultural reference. This might be done by actually presenting references in the article to existing models of female education in countries around the world. This should then only be presented as a reference and not individually commented upon.
- The bulk of any Wikipedia article should provide reference, not read as an essay advocating a position. This article needs objective elements which can ground it as a proper source of information, which is ultimately what an encyclopaedic article is supposed to be. As currently constructed this article is probably not proper for Wikipedia in my opinion. I do agree that it is very well written and well sourced. It can still be salvaged, but the concept must be defined in objective terms. unak1978 11:53, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
- This page would not look like an essay if the original thought were tied to sources. I recommend that every sentence in this article be followed by a citation. This is a great practice for researchers anyway, because it signals when someone is injecting their own thought and bias into what they write versus what content is actually from scholarly peer-reviewed sources. This article does seem to me to be WP:SYNTH but it is still okay. This is not ideal for Wikipedia but it is not so out of place that it ought to be removed just so long as it has the "essay" tag indicating the problem. Blue Rasberry (talk) 11:26, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Given that the article covered both economic and social development, it seemed appropriate to remove an extra modifier from the title and simply call it Female education and development. Bwl5 (talk) 07:03, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
SOCI 280 Peer Review Comments
The following comments are posted as part of a Peer Review assignment for the Rice University "Poverty, Justice, and Human Capabilities" course noted in the above banner.
Generally, I believe this article is a well thought-out commentary on a relevant social matter in human development. I find it perplexing that this article has been tagged as an essay, which Wikipedia terms articles that "Typically contain advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors." This article seems to contain neither advice nor opinions; it presents views from reputed sources that are appropriately referenced. Additionally, it does not consider only a one-sided point of view, but notes how women's education may not translate to gains in outcomes for development, and acknowledges the limitations of research in this field.
That being said, there are some recommendations I would make to improve this article. First, what other pages on Wikipedia currently link to this one? To generate increased contribution and dialogue on this topic, I would encourage further contributors to cross-link it to/from other relevant Wikipedia articles. Moreover, it may be worthwhile to give a brief overview as to why women's education is a topic of social concern. The article states that women's education lags behind that of men and considers the outcomes of gains in women's education, but I would welcome additional consideration of the causes for this inequality. It may also, time pending, be worthwhile to consider the regional variation in this topic; I would expect that the ways that this topic manifests in North America or Western Europe, for example, differ from Sub-Saharan Africa or Southeast Asia, and so on. On a last note, I would recommend the addition of any graphs or charts that may speak to the points that are presented in this Wikipedia article; such well-placed images might provide more quantitative clarification of the disparities in education by gender or the effect of women's education on human development.
Peer review for SOCI 280
The following is a peer review for SOCI 280 at Rice University:
As far as the breadth of this article goes, I would suggest adding more to the "Social benefits" section and maybe even adding subsections. You touch on a lot of important concepts (such as reproductive health, civic participation, and benefits within a family) but all of these could definitely be expanded upon. In addition, you might rename "Ineffectiveness" to "Obstacles to development", as that seems to be what you are describing. Well-cited overall - a few places could use a citation, and the article perhaps could use a few more, but not bad. NPOV has improved - there are only a few spots now where this article seems persuasive.
As far as readability goes:
- when you can use fewer words to get the point across, do so - it's a bit wordy in places.
- using simpler words is not necessarily bad - right now, some of your language seems unnecessarily complex.
There are other suggested copy-edits in the document I shared with you via email. Formatting looks good. No images, but I'm not sure if they are truly necessary. Overall, a few things could be fleshed out more, but this is pretty good, especially considering that you created the article from scratch. Ktpost68 (talk) 05:59, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bwl5! Your article is an important contribution to Wikipedia and has lots of great information. However, it does basically assume that the link between female education and development exists and is significant enough to warrant an article. I think you need a first section detailing studies from multiple sources that establish the link between female education and human development, which could include a lot of the information you currently have in your introduction and in the Measurement section (side note: the introduction should be an overview of the information contained later in the article and should not have any citations of its own). You could also make the article more neutral by renaming "Economic benefits" as "Effects on economic development"; "Social benefits" as "Effects on social development"; and "Ineffectiveness" as "Limitations of impact" or something like that.
This article topic appears to have scope issues, as others have mentioned. My quickest fix would be renaming it "International development and female education" (for further clarity), but the main issue is that it is not expanding summary-style out from international development or female education, so it isn't clear what exactly needs to be discussed in this topic. Ideally, there should be a paragraph at one of those articles and then linked to here, if one wants to read more. I see significant overlap between this article and The Girl Effect. Ostensibly this topic would be the parent to TGE, but as it's written, I'm not sure how they're different in scope. 13:50, 15 February 2014 (UTC)