Education and work in service of the nation: Canadian and Australian girls' fiction, 1908-1921
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter compares early twentieth-century Australian novels by Ethel Turner, Mary Grant Bruce, and Lilian Turner to Canadian novels by Nellie McClung and L.M. Montgomery to demonstrate important differences in attitudes towards education and work. Girls’ fiction in these white settler colonies has many similarities, containing strong ideals related to domesticity, education, employment, and femininity. In the Canadian fiction, attitudes towards women’s higher education and employement are generally much more positive. Although both Australian and Canadian girls’ fiction typically conclude with marriage, Montgomery’s Anne of Green Gables and Nellie McClung’s Pearlie Watson are offered the opportunity to pursue higher education and use this education to teach others. In contrast, Lilian Turner’s Paradise and the Perrys, Ethel Turner’s Fair Ines, and Mary Grant Bruce’s ’Possum emphasise the importance of domesticity while also showing how girls sought to earn income without leaving home. Through our comparison of these Canadian and Australian novels, all published between 1908 and 1921, we demonstrate how the different feminine ideals embodied through these heroines are inevitably intertwined with the needs of the nation
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".