Organized Extracurricular Activities: Are In‐School and Out‐of‐School Activities Associated With Different Outcomes for Canadian Youth?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Participation in extracurricular activities can have positive effects on youth, with greater participation associated with higher academic as well as better socioemotional and behavioral outcomes. Little research has examined differential effects of in-school and out-of-school activities. METHODS: This study examines in-school and out-of-school extracurricular activities for 14- to 17-year-olds using a population-based sample of Canadian youth. Associations with socioemotional and academic outcomes, and having tried smoking, alcohol, and marijuana were examined. RESULTS: Weekly participation in both in-school and out-of-school activities were associated with positive and negative outcomes. In particular, youth who participated in out-of-school activities or in both in-school and out-of-school activities had better socioemotional outcomes. Academic outcomes were associated with in-school and out-of-school sports and nonsport activities. Youth who participated weekly in nonsport activities regardless of the context (in-school or out-of-school) were less likely to have tried smoking, alcohol, or marijuana. However, weekly participation in in-school sports was associated with an increased likelihood of failing a course; youth who participated weekly in out-of-school sports were more likely to have tried alcohol. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that participation in extracurricular activities, regardless of context, encourage positive youth development.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it