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
During the first half of the twentieth century, “practice houses,” or home management houses, thrived in home economics departments of land-grant universities around North America. Practice houses were domestic settings where young women could get hands-on training and experience in all the latest methods and technologies to efficiently manage domestic space and activity. They were also part of a larger trend of professionalization of home economic activities, intimately related to scientific rhetoric. This article discusses the Department of Home Economics’ practice house at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg, Canada, where during the 1930s and 1940s, thirty-three “borrowed” children (from the city’s department of child welfare), referred to as practice babies, were tended to by a monthly rotation of women students who themselves were supervised by a house mother. The article situates the practice babies at the intersection of two historical trajectories, that of home economics itself and that of child-rearing advice, and draws attention to the ways in which the babies, and the women who cared for them, were mutually and jointly gendered. The narrative of the rise and fall of the practice babies in Winnipeg contributes to the literature on changing ideologies of scientific motherhood with an argument for feminist scholarship to develop a more ethnographically grounded linkage of children to women.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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