Structure du capital, différenciation selon le sexe et « vocation » intellectuelle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On ne peut comprendre l'innovation qu'a représentée l'accès des premières femmes issues de la bourgeoisie à l'enseignement supérieur en France, en particulier dans les institutions préparant le plus directement à l'enseignement et aux professions intellectuelles, sans prendre en compte non seulement les transformations sociales, politiques, économiques, intervenues entre 1880 et 1930, mais aussi le volume de capital culturel et économique transmis par les familles et surtout la structuré du capital et l'évolution de cette structure sur plusieurs générations. Dans les années 1960, en période de forte expansion de l'accès des femmes aux études et au marché du travail, le volume et la structure du capital constituent encore des facteurs explicatifs importants des "vocations" intellectuelles en particulier: l'opposition entre l'École normale supérieure de Sèvres où les élèves se préparaient à devenir enseignantes ou chercheurs et Sciences Pô dont les élèves attendaient surtout un complément de "culture générale" en fournit une bonne illustration.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".