From Paper to Practice: The Potential of Haitian Women's Fiction as a Conscious Raising Developmental Resource
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Within this thesis I explore the idea of using feminist fiction to further women's empowerment in the context of a developing area. Taking the use of feminist fiction as a conscious raising resource during the second wave of feminism in Canada, the United States and England as a starting point, I look to the canon of feminist fiction of Haiti as an unmined resource that may be used for similar purposes. I argue that texts within this canon may be used in the same way if it can be shown that they deal with the evolution or manifestation of feminist (oppositional) consciousness through the narratives of female protagonists. As such, I undertake the qualitative content analysis of five texts from five Haitian female authors using, as a measuring gauge, the four elements of minimal oppositional consciousness as put forward and defined by Mansbridge (2001). As oppositional consciousness plays an important causal role in the motivation to work for or act as agents within liberation movements, the potential within these feminist texts to rouse or crystallize such a consciousness within Haitian women provides the link between feminist fiction and the ultimate empowerment of Haitian women.
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 | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".