THE COLOURED WOMEN’S CLUB OF MONTREAL, 1902-1940
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To date, there is limited literature documenting contributions of people of African descent to Canadian social welfare history. Based on both secondary and archival sources, we critically explore from anti-Black racism and African-Canadian feminist per\spectives, the contributions of the Coloured Women’s Club of Montreal (CWCM) from 1902-1940 to the social well-being of Montreal’s Black community. The CWCM played a major role as one of the leading supports for members who encountered harsh challenges in a society where racism prevailed and opportunities for men and women were severely restricted. Club members organized several events that enabled community members to survive in an environment that was hostile to people of African descent, therefore becoming a “pillar of strength” that fostered a stronger sense of community among Blacks living in Montreal. We contend that through their contributions during this time period, these African-Canadian women emerged as key players in the community and secondly, as early social welfare practitioners. It is imperative for social workers to acknowledge the contributions of the women who were involved in the CWCM as a means of interrupting the historical narratives shaping our profession that have predominantly been told from the perspectives of a hegemonic, white culture.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".