Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leadership was characterized as patriarchal and hierarchical during the 19th and early 20th centuries. Pioneer women were often not credited with leadership qualities although many, including school teachers, journalists, suffragettes, healthcare workers, and social activists played an important role in the development of Manitoba communities. This study hypothesized that women were engaged in unrecognized leadership strategies within that contemporary culture. This research explored whether three particular Manitoba pioneer women, Margaret Scott (1855-1931), Margret Benedictsson (1866- 1956), and Jessie McDermott (1870-1950), did, in fact, practice a form of leadership. This leadership form was identified as servant leadership and defined by Robert K. Greenleaf (1904-1990) in his seminal work, Servant as Leader (197011991b). Areas of investigation included leadership theory; Manitoba history, and the role of women during the time period that was common to their lives, 1870-1930. Qualitative historical analysis methodology was used to examine the lives of the three women. Various primary sources (archival papers, autobiographies, newspapers, letters, historical photographs, and committee minutes) and secondary sources (texts related to Manitoba history, journal articles, and servant-leadership theory) were utilized. Data enabled the construction of biographical profiles of the lives of the three women. It was not the intent of the author to rewrite their histories, but rather to analyze their lives and related materials for evidence of the ten characteristics (or their proxies) of servant-leadership: listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, and foresight, commitment to the growth of people, stewardship, and building community.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".