Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recognising the central role of sports coaching in the delivery of an active and winning nation, SRSA and SASCOC have agreed to the establishment of a Coaches Commission. This Commission, operating within SASCOC, has been charged with the responsibility ‘to investigate a coaching system for South African Sport’ and to include the evaluation of other systems across the world. As part of this work, the Commission has the support of the Technical and Administrative staff of SASCOC. The Commission has also examined issues relating to coach education through a Task Team involving representatives from the University of Johannesburg and Stellenbosch University. Delegates from SASCOC; SRSA and the Coaches Commission attended the global conference of the International Council for Coach Education (ICCE) in Vancouver in November 2009. The event outlined recent developments in the European Framework for the Recognition of Coaching Competence and Qualifications and the proposed development of a global framework as part of the draft strategy of ICCE. At the Vancouver conference, discussions occurred with the Professor Patrick Duffy on the issues associated with the development of a South African Coaching Framework. These discussions continued following the conference and a scoping visit was initiated with the support of UK Sport as part of its London 2012 International Inspiration 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.
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 | 0.028 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.025 | 0.034 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.004 |
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".