MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

“Olympism” Revisited as Context for Global Education: Implications for Physical Education

2001· article· en· W1980377922 on OpenAlexaff
Deanna Binder

Bibliographic record

VenueQuest · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumContext (archaeology)Global educationDiversity (politics)Physical educationSociologyPhenomenonPedagogyPolitical scienceCultural diversityPublic relationsGeographyEpistemologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The modem Olympic Games, which in their current form originated in the 1890s as an educational reform movement, have become a “profound and deeply embedded component of our global culture” (Segrave & Chu, 1996a, p. 31) Challenges, paradoxes, and future possibilities of a revisioned Olympic education are explored in this article. The context for these reflections is an Olympic curriculum project based in Athens, Greece and focussed on the development and implementation of an international teacher's resource book for elementary schools. In this perticular project, negotiated through the complexities of contemporary curriculum theory. Olympic Eurocentric universal ist values, and cross-cultural diversity, a great deal was learned about whether the transnational phenomenon of the Olympic movement is an appropriate context for helping teachers throughout the world address global educational priorities. The preliminary conclusions have significant implications for physical education.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.033
Scholarly communication0.0110.011
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.105
GPT teacher head0.559
Teacher spread0.454 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuestSame topicPhysical Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207