Textbook Cases: Postwar Adolescent Development in Crawley Films’ McGraw–Hill Film–Text Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores a series of mental hygiene films produced by Crawley Films in the 1950s to support a McGraw–Hill textbook, Adolescent Development, first published by Elizabeth B. Hurlock in 1949. These films reflect a post-WWII turn to social guidance and a pedagogy of health, part of the “mental hygiene point of view” that came to dominate postwar sex education via psychology and family life education curricula. As part of this analysis, the article discusses pre- and post-production negotiations and competing interests at play between Hurlock’s textbook, the series’ sponsor, and Crawley Films, which was tasked with adapting key concepts faithfully from the textbook to the screen. These exchanges, in the form of letters between Crawley Films (specifically Judith Crawley, who scripted the series) and the McGraw–Hill division in charge of overseeing the textbook films, are illuminated by examining archival material from the Crawley Collection housed in Library and Archives of 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".