Ruth A. Frager and Carmela Patrias. Discounted Labour: Women Workers in Canada, 1870-1939\n
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ruth Frager and Carmela Patrias set out to explore the historical roots of pay inequity in Canada and are driven by two very important questions: how did women become confined to lower paying work, and why did this happen?Their book, Discounted Labour: Women Workers in Canada, 1870-1939, provides important insights into these questions and helps us understand the social, political, cultural, religious and economic factors that contributed to the development of Canada's contemporary division of labour and women's subordinate place within it. 33.1, 2008www.msvu.ca/atlantisproblematize "women" as a category, exploring different groups of women, internal heterogeneity, racism and classism, but also consider how women fostered collective support and struggle based primarily on gender and/or class.Unfortunately, despite comprehensive bibliographies for each chapter, the book contains no in-text citations, footnotes or endnotes.This makes further research on a specific item of interest difficult and serves as a poor model of referencing for students.Overall, however, the book is an important resource for women's studies, labour studies and history students and an excellent introduction for newcomers to the scholarship on women's work in late nineteenth-and early twentieth-century Canada.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 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".