Picturing the Professionalization of Planning in Canada,1901 - 1927
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
This article looks at how city\nplanners distinguished themselves from\nthe broader\nurban reform movement,\nwomen’s groups in particular, in early\ntwentieth-century Canada. In doing so,\nit considers how and why the planning\nprofession developed. It examines the\nactivities of the Town Planning Institute\nof Canada (TPIC) and argues that the planners\nconstituted their professional status in\nrelation to the ideal of the “City Practical.”\nI maintain that the TPIC used an image of\nthis new urban ideal, which was based on\nthe principles of economic efficiency and\nscientific management, in their quest for\nprofessional recognition. By comparing the\nTPIC with the national volunteer organization\nof women, the National Council\nof Women of Canada (NCWC), I show\nhow the planning profession relied on a\nmasculinized visual discourse to define\nspecialized fields of professional expertise\nthat only they were qualified to work\non. This contrasted with the practices of\nthe NCWC, who legitimized their reform\nactivities through the discourse of domestic\neconomy.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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