MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3208398671 · doi:10.82308/10226

The Protestant Orphan Asylum and the Montreal Ladies' Benevolent Society : a case study in Protestant child charity in Montreal, 1822-1900

2001· article· en· W3208398671 sur OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Janice Harvey

Notice bibliographique

RevueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2001
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueCanadian Identity and History
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesMcGill University
Mots-clésProtestantismPolitical scienceLawSociologyArt

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

As Lower Canada/Quebec industrialized, the system of poor relief that developed followed a private, confessional model. While the Catholic Church controlled services for Catholics, the lay Protestant elite controlled the relief network for their community. Elite women played a major role in this network, managing most of the charities for women and children. This thesis uses the two most important female-directed Montreal charities---the Protestant Orphan Asylum and the Montreal Ladies' Benevolent Society---to study Protestant charity and particularly child charity from 1822 to 1900. It examines the organization and work of female charity committees as well as the services offered, the relevance of gender to charity management, and attitudes to childhood and family. Extensive source material, from the archives of the two societies, enables an analysis of the characteristics of the children admitted, as well as of the management committees, and their policies. In this period, serving on a charity board was an expected activity for elite women. As a result, committees had many members. However, this thesis reveals that only a small number of women actually participated in the substantial administrative and organizational work that was involved in running a charity. This lack of participation made it more difficult to supervise the institutions and to organize fund-raising events. Formed by the elite to regulate as well as to help the poor, these charities permit an examination of working-class agency. Organisers used their control of admissions and discharges as well as the institutional regime to impose their values of parenting and work. Nonetheless, the study of these two charities shows that families managed to use charities to shelter their children temporarily, occasionally circumventing restrictive access rules or challenging a charity's refusal to discharge children. As "ladies" acting in public, the women in control of these charities were influenced by restrictive gender ideologies, particularly that of "separate spheres." Gender conscious and conservative, they respected social conventions in their public appearances and deferred to men in critical areas such as investments. Yet, at the same time, they affirmed their abilities and defended their authority and their autonomy in areas considered in the women's sphere, including child-care and charity management. Understanding charity from within a conservative culture that emphasized religion, tradition, and values like work, family, and social hierarchy, these benevolent women sought to relieve the poor but they also sought to train useful citizens. In their charity work, they faced many complex questions connected to child abuse, changes in apprenticeship systems, adequate training for children, and the rights of parents. This study argues that both their conservative approach and their women's culture, centered on a personal approach, influenced the way they dealt with these issues. Of equal importance, however, was the experience they had acquired over years of child-charity work. As a result of these factors, their emphasis on protecting the children under their care increased over time. Consequently, the policies they developed in favour of helping families with temporary care and in favour of using apprenticeship and finally extended training in the institution itself diverged from those advocated by late-century reform groups, which opted for placing children in families instead of institutions and which advocated more restrictive, scientific charity methods.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,102
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,302

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0170,005
Communication savante0,0030,001
Science ouverte0,0020,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,231
Écart entre enseignants0,218 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations8
Publié2001
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Même sujetCanadian Identity and HistoryTravaux en français237 207