Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary On the basis of an analysis of works for children published by Ellenor Fenn (1743–1813) in the 1780s, an argument is offered concerning the significance of English grammar to the domestic education of elite boys and girls. The topic is contextualized in overviews of the high social value of grammar and of the maternal educator, idealized for her ‘civilizing’ influence, especially on men. Some elite mothers were criticized by Fenn and her contemporaries for preferring public life to domestic responsibility or for indulging their children. While acknowledging the difficulties of child-rearing and the challenges to women’s domestic authority, Fenn and others spell out the consequences of failing to train young males in particular. The author argues that educational toys and age-graded books like Fenn’s encouraged loving mothers to socialize their children while simultaneously displaying their wealth. Grammar, because of its associations with order, was central to this domestic curriculum. While not overtly challenging conventional gender roles, Fenn represented ‘sprightly’ young females not as intellectually superficial but as naturally quick to learn and playfully able to teach young males and females. Their pedagogical duties justified young women’s education and granted women educators domestic authority and public importance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".