MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4395058896 · doi:10.1353/vcr.2023.a925214

Open Windows: Teaching Mary Seacole

2023· article· en· W4395058896 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Adam Guy

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Open Windows: Teaching Mary Seacole Adam Guy (bio) I teach mary Seacole's autobiography of 1857, Wonderful Adventures of Mrs. Seacole in Many Lands, as part of a broad survey course titled Literature in English, 1830–1910. I teach this course to first-year undergraduate students in the first weeks of their English degrees at the University of Oxford. Since the majority of undergraduate education in Oxford takes place within its colleges rather than its faculties and departments, group sizes are small—roughly between three and twelve—and I usually teach between one and three of these groups each year. As a first-year teaching text, Wonderful Adventures is, among other things, a clear and engaging entry-point into talking about nineteenth-century literature and its entanglements with empire. As part of these discussions, Seacole's narration of her travels across the Americas to Britain enables me to introduce my students to the notion of the Black Atlantic. The text also provides an immediate challenge to students' notions of both what literature is and what autobiography is. Undergraduate readers coming to nineteenth-century literature tend to expect prose literature to be represented by the novel and to see autobiography as a simple transparent window on an individual's experience. Seacole's text helps us nuance both of these ideas, offering an engaging example of the fact that life writing was a distinct part of the nineteenth-century literary field and of the notion that autobiography can do more than simply relate a given personal truth. I begin my seminars on Seacole as she begins her text, with a discussion of her identity. As well as being the author of the widely selling Wonderful Adventures, Seacole—a free-born Jamaican woman—was a nurse, a hotelier, a businesswoman, and a traveller: she was born in Kingston in 1805 and died in London in 1881. All of these identities are in play as she narrates her personal history. The autobiography opens with Seacole's account of her "birth and patronage": "I was born in the town of Kingston, in the island of Jamaica, some time in the present century. As a female, and a widow, I may be well excused giving the precise date of this important event." She [End Page 33] goes on to add that she is "a Creole, and have good Scotch blood coursing in my veins" (11). As a teaching text, this opening works brilliantly as a general way of discussing the complex and multiple forms that identities can take; more specifically, it is as good an example as any of the identity discourses and categorizations available to writing subjects in the middle of the nineteenth century. I have long seen the latter notion to be a particularly important one to explore at the beginning of an English degree, a reminder for students that many aspects of identity and experience are historically circumscribed. Seacole's text can exemplify a nuanced form of historicism that breaks with students' preconceptions about the relationship between literature and history, a relationship too often taught at school level as a matter of finding one-to-one correspondences between literary materials and historical events. In this respect, Seacole's Wonderful Adventures becomes a paradigm for my students of how they might relate to and explore the literature of the past tout court. THE WONDERFUL ADVENTURES AS A PANDEMIC / EPIDEMIC TEXT At the onset of the 2020–21 academic year, in line with UK government policy, my institution returned to face-to-face teaching; the previous academic year had ended three-and-a-half months earlier amid a national COVID-19 lockdown during which all university business went online. The new academic year's return to the embodied world was both cautious and cavalier: cautious because of the heavy restrictions put on in-person interactions; cavalier because, with still so much to be learned about the virus and vaccines yet to be rolled out, student and staff lives were being put at risk. I taught two seminar groups that term. One seminar met in a dark-wallpapered nineteenth-century room from which the oak table had been removed. All participants sat on chairs spread out...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.017

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.349 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVictorian review→Same topicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics→French-language works237,207→