Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis focuses on three remarkable Canadian women (Lena Jolliffe, Mary Lamb and Agnes Hilliard) who lived and worked in Sichuan, China as Christian missionaries during the chaotic first half of the twentieth century. The thesis is built around three overarching themes: the experiences of these three Westerners in China who were there as missionaries, as women and as Canadians; their contributions to China; and their impact back in Canada. The thesis consists of five chapters. The first chapter introduces the study, provides an overview of the relevant historical context in China, and surveys the available English-language scholarly secondary source materials. Chapters Two, Three and Four deal respectively with each of the women, beginning with biographical sketches; providing overviews of the available archival materials; piecing together chronologically and thematically their individual China experiences and observations; and concluding with thematically-driven analytical overviews of their China experiences. Chapter Five thematically and comparatively revisits the China journeys of the three women. The sources on which this thesis is based are the letters and diaries of the women which have been deposited in the United Church of Canada archives in Toronto. The recipients of the letters were almost always family members or church friends. These three heroic Canadian women missionaries were effectively windows on China whose writings extend our understanding of China and its people. The thesis suggests that as missionaries, these women were more highly integrated into China than many other Westerners; that as missionary women, they were uniquely able to have direct and sustained contact with Chinese women; and that as Canadians, they were treated differently from other Westerners, occasionally serving as power brokers at the local level. These three women and their colleagues impacted upon China simply by being there as alternative role models; by their educational activities and public health instruction; and by initiating the liberation of Chinese women from their traditional restraints. They also had a significant impact upon Canada, particularly through their letters and furlough visits, which enhanced Canadian understanding of China.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.061 | 0.004 |
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.
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".