The After-School Programme: An Arena for Interaction with Others through Body Movements in Play
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article investigates how the body movements in children's play are related to their interaction with others. Qualitative material was gathered from close observation and qualitative research interviews among eight- and nine-year-old children in an after-school programme (ASP) in Norway. The theoretical perspective is phenomenological. The study shows that body movements in the children's self-chosen and child-managed play outdoors are extensive and arise from play situations where children spontaneously seek interaction with others. Such bodily interaction occurs largely in small groups of best friends or in larger groups that come together as the participants undertake the same activity. The children's body movements play a significant role in their interaction with others and can be interpreted as a fulfilment of their seeking such interaction. Based on the findings, it is recommended that self-chosen and child-managed play outdoors be encouraged in the ASP. While extensive body movements arise out of interaction in play, the play may also contribute to the children's health and development. The ASP can fill a complementary function to institutions with structured and adult-controlled activities.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".