Home economics education in British Columbia 1913-1936 : through postcolonial eyes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
My study examines white cultural practices in home economics education in British Columbia between 1913 and 1936 through two home economics manuals developed in the province for the express purpose of educating young women. My methodology is informed by postcolonial constructs, social feminism, and white studies. My experiences as a classroom teacher and as a volunteer teacher in Malawi are interwoven with my findings. I use the metaphor of white sauce, a recipe frequently made in traditional classrooms, in describing the current close alignment of home economics with white culture. To see home economics through postcolonial eyes means to examine the aftermath of practices that developed from colonial times. While the argument has been made that Canada is not postcolonial, for the purposes of my discussion, I consider it to be a settler colony. I examine three fundamental aspects of postcolonial analysis, gender, class, and race from the perspective that home economics is a gendered subject dominated by white cultural practices and practical rather than academic in focus. In conclusion I argue that no grand narrative is available for re-imagining home economics as a vital force in education. The voices of young professionals and examples of atypical home economics teachers demonstrate that change in home economics is possible. The recognition that home economics education of the past has reflected white cultural values will allow a re-envisioning of a more ethical, meaningful and responsive home economics education of the future. Other curriculum areas can also benefit from re-examining the roots of their practice.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".