Notice bibliographique
Résumé
There has always been a women's history in Canada.Women's historians, especially, have been recording it both orally and in writing since storytelling began.First Nations women, teaching and nursing sisters in New France, nineteenth-century British imperialists, and early twentieth-century feminists are only some of many who, individually or collectively, have passed down stories or have documented Canadian women's lives.There were accounts of mythic women, like Aataentsic, or of mortal heroines, like Madeleine de Vercheres, Laura Secord, and Lady Aberdeen, but there were also social histories of and historical novels about ordinary Canadian women.It is surprising, then, that women's history had to be rediscovered in the last three decades of the twentieth century.For those of us involved in that exciting task, there at first seemed little to go on and only gradually did we become aware of the abundance of fascinating work that had preceded our own women's history movement.The reasons for the relative inaccessibility of this early women's history are many.Mid-century "professional" historians defined themselves almost exclusively as university-trained and university-employed men; women historians were for a time almost shut out of the business.History, as defined by those boundary-creating professionals, was about political, military, and diplomatic events, with perhaps a little economic history thrown in.Cultural, labour, local, or domestic matters, of interest to many women and to some men, were seen to be of little or no importance.Such prejudices sadly continue, although fortunately they are shared by fewer and fewer historians, both inside and outside of the academy.A prejudice that academic historians have had a harder time shaking is their bias against writers of popular history.For those who care about women's history, this is a dangerous bias.It was, after all, the problematic line drawn between the professional and the amateur historian that in part accounted for the old sense that women were not really part of the Canadian historical record -or capable of being historians.Popular history (much of which is regional or local history) has never lost its appeal in Canada and women historians never ceased to write, but many academics dismissed both.With that dismissal, it could be argued, also came the dismissal of women's history.This present book demonstrates what a mistake that was.It is thus with great pleasure that I have followed the work of the editors who created this book.The past quarter-century has seen the development of a vibrant literature dealing with the history of Canadian women; there are now many collections of scholarly essays and we also have both English and French textbooks on the subject.Documentary collections exist as well, although they are not as easy to find, even in the university bookstores where most women's history books are sold.What we need more of, however, are well-researched and well-written works of a more popular nature, intended for the general public.This volume addresses that need.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,548 | 0,285 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».