MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1850962473 · doi:10.32316/hse/rhe.v27i2.4450

Tanya Fitzgerald and Elizabeth M. Smyth, eds., Women Educators, Leaders and Activists: Educational Lives and Networks 1900–1960

2015· article· en· W1850962473 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Rebecca Priegert Coulter

Bibliographic record

VenueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Education Studies Worldwide
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyGender studiesMedia studiesPolitical scienceGerontologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What happens when scholars, connected transnationally through networks of historical research on female educators, meet at a conference in the Antipodes?In an act of replication across time, they decide to draw on their own professional networks to plan and produce a book that turns our attention to the intellectual and personal networks of women who worked in education during the first half of the twentieth century.In Women Educators, Leaders and Activists: Educational Lives and Networks 1900 -1960, readers will find seven chapters, plus a useful introduction by the editors and a thoughtful conclusion by Deirdre Raftery, that contribute to an understanding of how women in the past understood, navigated, and shaped their worlds -worlds that were created by British imperialism, colonization, capitalism, religion, and patriarchy.Contributors to this volume provide insights into the efforts of women in six countries, England, Ireland, Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand, and demonstrate how ideas and individuals flowed among these national states.For example, in a nuanced reading of her evidence, Tanya Fitzgerald traces the work of two English women, Winifred Boys-Smith and Helen Rawson, and the American, Ann Gilchrist, in establishing a foothold for women at the University of New Zealand through the Department (later Faculty) of Home Science, and professionalizing that field of study.At first blush, this created an apparently separate ghetto for women, but Fitzgerald argues that the female professors, working strategically within a gendered setting, used the site to establish home science as an academic and scientific field while offering young women courses in chemistry, biology, and nutrition and preparing them for graduate work in the sciences as well as for careers in public health, dietetics, social welfare, institutional management, and the like.Indeed, graduates

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducationSame topicHistorical Education Studies WorldwideFrench-language works237,207