Engendering Education and Organisation: The Women’s Reform Movement in India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ‘woman question’ of the late nineteenth century India developed regarding the contestation of two primary actors. The British government advocated for their aim to ‘save’ the native women from their own barbaric society, as an extension of their ideal of their ‘civilising mission.’ The consequent emergence of the Indian middle class, comprised of both reform minded men and conservationists, who concerned themselves with differential aspects of the status of women in the colonial custom. Unsurprisingly, both these outlooks were voiced by, and reflected the indigenous and foreign men’s views of the Indian woman. The trajectory of the women’s reform movement in witnessing the active participation of women, is one that then holds immense significance to understand the cause of change, from the real recipients of the movement. This article elaborates upon the ‘educational experiment’ of the late nineteenth century in India, that paved way for a generation of women to subsequently organise themselves into becoming the leading voices of the movement. The attempt to place the baton of change in the hands of women, is one that deviates from nationalist and oriental historiography that excluded them of rightful claims based on conservatisms of different, but overlapping kinds.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".