An integral approach to sport management internships
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
Given the need for academia to develop students as knowledgeable professionals, experiential learning in the form of internships has become an important component of sport management curricula. Internships provide students opportunities to acquire an understanding of how theory is applied to practice as well as to experience personal growth and development. The purpose of this paper is to introduce how sport management programs can build upon current approaches to experiential learning by adopting the integral perspective of Ken Wilber (1995/2000a/2000b). It is suggested that an integral approach allows students to learn practical skills while correspondingly increasing the student's understanding and interpretation of the subjective elements (e.g. relationships, interactions, emotions) that lead to personal growth during the internship experience. A review of Wilber's Integral Approach is included followed by a review of concepts from relevant experiential learning theories and an example of an intern's experience to demonstrate the application of an integral approach to experiential learning and sport management internships The article concludes with a list of recommendations, representative of an integral approach, that can be used to enhance the internship experience for students.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.013 |
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