MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1804635684 · doi:10.32316/hse/rhe.v13i1.1855

Irene Gammel and Elizabeth Epperly, eds. L.M. Montgomery andCanadian Culture. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999.Pp. 267.

2001· article· en· W1804635684 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Ginny Ratsoy

Bibliographic record

VenueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducation · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyMedia studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historical Studies in Education/Revue d'histoire de l'educationNo greater illustration of the curious gap between scholarly interest and canonical integration comes to mind than the case of L.M. Montgomery and her work.The past few decades saw expression of scholarly interest in Montgomery, and it took many forms: myriad journal articles; multiple bio graphies of the writer, feminist studies of her heroines, annotated editions of her centrepiece novel, edited collections of her letters, and essays on her journals; and the creation of the L.M. Montgomery Institute at the University of Prince Edward Island (which has hosted international symposia, from one of which L.M. Montgomery and Canadian Culture had its genesis).Nevertheless, Montgomery's oeuvre has remained (despite its perennial populist appeal) nearly absent from the Canadian literary canon.Its editors offer this collection of twenty articles as a reconcept ualization-"the first systematic effort to investigate the question of the Canadianness of Montgomery's writing" (4)-and an interrogation of and a corrective to the exclusion of Canadian children's writing from literary anthologies aimed at the university market, and the dismissal of popular literature in official school curricula.The remedial powers of the collection can only be measured in due time.Already we know this lively and comprehensive volume will prove an invaluable resource for Canadianists.Although the great majority of the contributors are Canadian academics, the editors have eschewed a monolithic approach by engaging scholars from many disciplines-women's studies, Canadian studies, history, children's literature, and Canadian literature, among others-who deploy varied critical strategies.Such well-known Canadian writers as Frank Davey and Carole Gerson are joined by a handful of international scholars, including Yoskiko Akamatsu ofJapan and Theodore Sheckels of the United States.The few non-academic contributors, notably Adrienne Clarkson and Margaret Atwood, provide further textual variegation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score0.677

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.012

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducationSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207