Anita M. Myers Program Evaluation for Exercise Leaders. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1999.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RÉSUMÉ Program Evaluation for Exercise Leaders constitue une ressource précieuse pour les moniteurs d'éducation physique qui ont besoin deprendre des décisions éclairées en regard du marché actuel. Le textes' applique aux clients âgés et fragiles de l'industrie du conditionnement physique et du secteur des services de récréation. On y trouve neuf exemples démontrant l'utilité de l'évaluation des programmes à l'égard d'une clientèle diversifiée. Au chapitre des forces de ce livre, citons son approche pratique échelonnée, ses illustrations, ses feuilles de travail qui contribuent à retenir l'attention du lecteur et enfin, l'inclusion de questions de sondage et d'instruments de qualité de vie. Le livre s'avère une ressource précieuse pour ceux qui dirigent des programmes d'exercice ou qui en ont la responsabilité.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.062 | 0.010 |
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".