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
20 years ago I was one of the ‘new voices’ invited to contribute a short piece to Sandra Grey and Marian Sawer’s Women’s Movements: Flourishing or in Abeyance (2008) in that piece I asked “please remember that young women are not the leaders of tomorrow. We are leaders of the women’s movement today. However, do not think that this means that we want to do it without earlier generations of women’s movement activists” (Lewis, 2008, p147). Disappointingly, I'm still making the same argument, that young/er women’s voices and concerns within the women’s movement are too often overlooked, and old/er women need to contribute to making space for young/er women within our organisations – a practice that might be considered one of ‘intergenerational solidarity’. \n \nWhile solidarity has often been considered across race, sexuality and socio-economic groups (Segal, 2013), intergenerational solidarity is more commonly discussed in academic papers in terms of family relationships, rather than as a political practice. One of the few places in which there is a repeating interest in exploring questions of intergenerational work is within feminist organisations, and in journals with close ties to the women’s movement (Abeysekera, 2004, Alpizar and Wilson, 2005). A number of international women’s organisations, the World YWCA, AWID, Isis International, and Development Alternatives with Women for a New Era (DAWN) have ongoing programmes of work to address barriers to young women’s leadership in their organisations. \n \nWithin the field of leadership studies, the implicit assumption is that our leaders are old, or at least old/er people. Carole A. MacNeil drew attention to this gap within leadership studies through her analysis of Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership noting that although the book reviews “five thousand leadership studies, there is nothing about youth as leaders or about leadership development for youth” (2006, citing Bass 1981). MacNeil’s reference to Stogdill’s handbook dates back to the original publication, however, a brief review of the 4th edition suggests little has changed, while there was one brief and positive mention of old/er leaders within the discussions of minority leaders, no discussion of young/er leaders was readily identifiable (Bass, 2008). But the idea that the under-representation of young people in leadership roles in organisations and civil society is a problem is one that is starting to gain momentum (Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2014, United Nations Development Programme, 2013). \n \nThe arguments as to why it is important that women’s voices are heard in civil society are well rehearsed (Childs and Lovenduski, 2013), and similar arguments can be made for young women, but rarely have been. In this paper I want to highlight why in order to strengthen campaigns such as girls education and child marriage we need to ensure that not only the voices of young women and girls are heard, but that their leadership within our movements and movement organisations are recognised and respected. And that in order to achieve this we will need to develop practices of intergenerational solidarity. \n \nReferences \n \nABEYSEKERA, S. 2004. Social Movements, Feminist Movements, and the State: A Regional Perspective [Online]. Available: http://www.isiswomen.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=518:social-movements-feminist-movements-and-the-state-a-regional-perspective&catid=116&Itemid=452 [Accessed 7 November 2016]. \nALPIZAR, L. & WILSON, S. 2005. Making waves: how young women can (and do) transform organizations and movements. Spotlight. Toronto: Association of Women in Development. \nBASS, B. M. 2008. Handbook of leadership: theory, research, and application, New York, Free Press. \nCHILDS, S. & LOVENDUSKI, J. 2013. Political Representation. In: WAYLEN, G., CELIS, K., KANTOLA, J. & WELDON, L. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Gender and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. \nGREY, S. & SAWER, M. 2008. Women's movements: flourishing or in abeyance?, Routledge. \nINTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION 2014. Youth Participation in National Parliaments. \nLEWIS, E. 2008. New Voices. In: GREY, S. & SAWER, M. (eds.) Women's movements: flourishing or in abeyance? Oxon, UK: Routledge. \nMACNEIL, C. A. 2006. Bridging generations: Applying "adult" leadership theories to youth leadership development. New Directions for Youth Development, Spring, pp27-43. \nSEGAL, L. 2013. Today, Yesterday & Tomorrow: Between Rebellion and Coalition Building. In: ROWBOTHAM, S., SEGAL, L. & WAINWRIGHT, H. (eds.) Beyond the fragments: Feminism and the making of socialism. London: Merlin Press. \nUNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME 2013. Enhancing Youth Political Participation throughout the Electoral Cycle. New York: United Nations Development Programme.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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