Women Rarely Worthy of Study: A History of Curriculum Reform in Ontario Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The topic of women and education has historically held a strong focus in the history of education field. Feminist scholars brought together the fields of women's studies and the history of education. Their research examined the hierarchies embedded in the social structures of education departments. Such work left an important mark in the historiography of the field, but the focus on women and gender has dropped off in recent years. This is despite the fact that there is still a great deal of work that must be done to effect change. This article explores the stalled progress and even regression towards incorporating women’s histories and stories in schools. We provide a case study analysis of the history of curriculum reform in Ontario from the 1960s to the present to demonstrate that over the last five decades women’s issues have been squeezed into the margins of Ontario’s educational learning objectives and related policy initiatives. We conclude that to support a new wave of feminist consciousness among young people women’s issues must become a mandatory and integral part of education. All women’s issues, ways of knowing, historical experiences, and justice movements must be central to curricular reform.Résumé Le thème des femmes et de l’éducation a toujours été un élément prédominant dans le champ de l’histoire de l’éducation. Les chercheurs féministes ont réuni les champs des études féministes et de l’histoire de l’éducation. Leurs recherches ont étudié les hiérarchies intégrées dans les structures sociales des départements de l’éducation. Bien que ce travail ait marqué l’historiographie de manière importante, l’accent mis sur les femmes et le genre a chuté au cours des dernières années. Ceci en dépit du fait qu’il reste beaucoup de travail à faire pour produire du changement. Cet article explore la stagnation, et même la régression, du mouvement vers l’intégration des femmes et de leurs histoires dans les écoles. Nous présentons une analyse de l’histoire de la réforme des programmes scolaires en Ontario des années 1960 à aujourd’hui pour démontrer qu’au cours des cinq dernières décennies, les enjeux relatifs aux femmes ont été réduits aux marges des objectifs éducatifs de l’Ontario et des initiatives politiques connexes. Nous concluons que pour soutenir une nouvelle vague de conscience féministe chez les jeunes, les enjeux relatifs aux femmes doivent devenir une partie intégrante et obligatoire de l’éducation.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".