Colonial counterparts: the first academic women in Anglo-Canada, New Aealand and Australia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract During the early years of the twentieth century, women first gained permanent academic positions in most universities across the Western world. This article considers the first academic women in Anglo-Canada, New Zealand and Australia as colonial counterparts. It argues that these women's experiences were shaped by a colonial setting that was infused with powerful gender-, race- and class-specific codes concerning knowledge and the institution of the university. The first academic women were simultaneously situated as ‘insiders’, as supporters of the institutions in which they worked, and as ‘outsiders’ because of their sex and the patriarchal attitudes of the time. In recovering some of their lives and experiences, it is shown how such a positioning shaped the careers of academic women, as well as how these women attempted to subvert and change their place within the university. As a group, the first academic women in Anglo-Canada, New Zealand and Australia were much more concerned with advancing the place of women in higher education than they were with critiquing the colonial knowledges that were a part of their various institutions.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it