Review: <i>A Girl Can Do: Recognizing and Representing Girlhood</i>, edited by Tiffany R. Isselhardt
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Book Review| May 01 2024 Review: A Girl Can Do: Recognizing and Representing Girlhood, edited by Tiffany R. Isselhardt A Girl Can Do: Recognizing and Representing Girlhood edited by Tiffany R. Isselhardt. Wilmington, DE: Vernon Press, 2022. 272 pp.; illustrations, notes, index; clothbound, $119.00, paperback, $52.00, eBook, $96.00. Monica L. Mercado Monica L. Mercado Colgate University Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar The Public Historian (2024) 46 (2): 194–196. https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2024.46.2.194 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Monica L. Mercado; Review: A Girl Can Do: Recognizing and Representing Girlhood, edited by Tiffany R. Isselhardt. The Public Historian 1 May 2024; 46 (2): 194–196. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2024.46.2.194 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentThe Public Historian Search A flourishing academic field of Girlhood Studies—with its own journal and the support of a growing cohort of interdisciplinary scholars examining gender, childhood, and youth—has taken shape over the last twenty years. As the announcement of a new Girlhood Studies Collective out of Rutgers University-Newark asked in 2022, what does it mean to invoke "the girl" as the central subject of research and inquiry? It is a question ripe for public historians to answer. Similar questions drive the work of public historian Tiffany R. Isselhardt, a writer for the website Girl Museum (www.girlmuseum.org), whose edited volume A Girl Can Do: Recognizing and Representing Girlhood emerged from preparations for the 2020 National Council on Public History annual meeting. Building from her panel's focus on "Remembering American Girlhood," Isselhardt draws together essays from thirteen contributors representing the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Indigenous communities across North and... You do not currently have access to this content.
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 | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.058 | 0.047 |
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".