MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2995779637 · doi:10.14288/1.0387079

Enhancing Communication and Awareness of UBC Recreational Programming in Commuter and Resident Students

2019· article· en· W2995779637 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Teddy Y. Wu, Hilary Rackham, Daniel Lam, Delaney Stone-Kerr, Johnson Chun-Sing Cheung

Notice bibliographique

RevuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueEducational Games and Gamification
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésRecreationComputer scienceMedical educationPolitical scienceMedicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In this report ‘Recreation Gaps Pilot Program Evaluation,’ self-identified female students attending the University of British Columbia (UBC) who did not participate in “Move More, Learn More”, a physical activity promotion initiative, were analyzed in order to better understand their knowledge of the program, interest in participating, and suggested methods for communicating the program. Specifically, students in this demographic who commute to UBC campus were compared to those who reside there. The initiative was the outcome of a 2018 Equity Enhancement Fund by the UBC Equity & Inclusion Office that was granted to the UBC Department of Athletics and Recreation to establish an initiative to promote physical on the UBC campus in Vancouver. Due to the notion that female Chinese students represent the largest subset of students enrolled at UBC and also report the lowest levels of physical activity, the pilot program was focused on this demographic. However, all female students were able to attend. Launched by the Physical Activity Office in February 2019, the program took place two times a week for under an hour for six weeks in a group of 5-25 participants. To assess commuter and resident non-participants of the program, a group of students in KIN 464: Health Promotion and Physical Activity worked together with community partners from Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) to carryout objectives of the study. A literature review was conducted to examine physical activity trends in post-secondary commuter and resident students and the barriers to engaging in exercise that they face. To collect data, surveys were conducted through online recruitment using social media sites such as Facebook and alternative online social platforms such as Canvas. Survey questions inquired about commuter or residential status, history of engagement in previous UBC programs, and efficient communication methods of UBC events. Results revealed that both commuter and resident students were deterred from UBC programming due to time constraints, specifically academic obligations. Both groups reported that they would prefer an evening program that occurred frequently throughout the week so as to accommodate a wide range of schedules. Furthermore, Facebook was the primary recommended platform for advertisement, including a focus on sharing such events in a selection of academic and non-academic UBC-affiliated groups and clubs such as the UBC Asian Calligraphy club. Based on the quantitative and qualitative data collected, recommendations were made to SEEDS to increase awareness and participation in UBC physical activity programming, and to effectively communicate future programs to accomplish this. First, communication of the program can be enhanced by expanding social media posts to include tailored information for commuter students, posting in a wide range of UBC-affiliated groups, and creating social media groups for commuters specifically. Increasing awareness and participation may be accomplished by increasing the frequency in which a program is offered, using tailored prizes as incentives, and promoting team events where commuters and residents can compete against each other. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,020
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,039

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,261
Écart entre enseignants0,247 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Même sujetEducational Games and GamificationTravaux en français237 207