MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801747391 · doi:10.32316/hse/rhe.v30i1.4543

The Writing of Women into Canadian Educational History in English Canada and Francophone Quebec, 1970 to 1995

2018· article· en· W2801747391 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Sharon Anne Cook, Ruby Heap, Lorna R. McLean

Bibliographic record

VenueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipFrenchTransformative learningGender studiesCommissionSociologyFeminismPolitical scienceWomen's historyHumanitiesLawArtPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 1970 Report of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women of Canada represents the first official federal document to examine the situation of women in Canadian education through a feminist lens. It paid close attention to education, claiming that “whenever women are denied access to education, they cannot be said to have equality.” Feminist historians participated in this transformative movement in response to an increasing demand to make women visible; the new social history, which developed novel methodologies in its quest to recover the past from the bottom up, assisted them in their efforts to develop the field of women’s history across Canada. Our article examines the importance of feminist associations, publishing houses, journals, and awards in supporting the development of scholarship on women and education. We follow that overview with comments about the earliest scholars working in this field, concentrating first on those in English Canada and then moving to the history of the field in French Canada.RésuméLe Rapport de la Commission royale d’enquête sur la situation de la femme au Canada de 1970 constitue le premier document fédéral officiel à étudier la situation des femmes dans l’éducation canadienne dans une perspective féministe. Il a accordé une attention particulière à l’éducation, affirmant que lorsqu’« on refuse à une femme la possibilité de faire les mêmes études que l’homme, on ne peut dire qu’elle bénéficie de l’égalité ». Les historiennes et historiens, en majorité des chercheuses féministes, ont participé à ce mouvement de transformation en réponse à la demande croissante pour rendre les femmes visibles. Ayant contribué à développer de nouvelles méthodologies cherchant à reconstituer le passé à partir d’une approche « du bas vers le haut », la nouvelle histoire sociale leur a permis de développer le champ de l’histoire des femmes à travers le Canada. Notre article examine l’importance des associations féministes, des maisons d’édition, des revues et des prix comme soutien au développement de la recherche sur les femmes et l’éducation. Dans un second temps, nous examinons les figures pionnières de la recherche dans ce domaine, en nous concentrant d’abord sur les personnalités importantes du Canada anglais, avant de poursuivre avec l’histoire de ce champ de recherche au Canada français.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.827

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.011
Science and technology studies0.0350.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducationSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207