MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097505085

Presenting the evidence: Quality physical education for Canadian children and youth. Position statement by: Physical and Health Education Canada

2010· article· en· W2097505085 on OpenAlexaffabout
James Mandigo

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue phénEPS / PHEnex Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosition statementPhysical educationPosition (finance)Quality (philosophy)PsychologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsMedical educationMedicinePedagogyBusinessFamily medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The benefits of regular physical activity cannot be overstated. In particular, the importance of quality physical education programs for every Canadian child is the foundation upon which these benefits are derived. Physical education is the one place within Canadian society in which every child has equal and equitable opportunities to develop the attitudes, skills, and knowledge to lead an active, healthy lifestyle. The objective of this position statement by Physical and Health Education Canada (PHE Canada) is to present the evidence behind the importance of ensuring that every student attending primary and secondary schools across Canada receives a quality physical education program on a regular basis (i.e., 150 minutes per week) from a teacher qualified to teach in physical education. As this statement will demonstrate, despite the wide range of support from various sectors (e.g., health, education, sport) and the research evidence behind the importance of quality physical education programs, Canada is not meeting the fundamental rights of children and youth in our schools. As a result, many Canadian children face a future of serious health consequences that will not only place a significant burden on our health care system, but will seriously jeopardize their overall quality of life. This position statement provides a series of recommendations based on previous research for decision and policy makers to consider in order to ensure Canadian physical education programs help develop a generation of children and youth who will lead active, healthy lifestyles. On ne saurait trop insister sur les bienfaits d'un mode de vie physiquement actif. De fait, ils confirment l'importance qu'il y a a offrir des programmes d'education physique de qualite a tous les enfants du Canada. Le domaine de l'education physique est le seul secteur de la societe canadienne qui peut offrir a chaque enfant une chance equitable et egale d'acquerir les attitudes, les competences et les connaissances necessaires pour mener une vie saine et active. Cet enonce de position produit par Education physique et sante Canada (EPS Canada) repose sur des donnees probantes confirmant l'importance de garantir que chaque jeune qui frequente une ecole elementaire ou secondaire au Canada profite d'un programme d'education physique de qualite sur une base reguliere (c.-a-d., 150 minutes par semaine) et de cours d'education physique donnes par des enseignantes et des enseignants competents et dument formes pour enseigner l'education physique. Comme le demontre cet enonce, malgre l'appui generalise de divers secteurs (p. ex., la sante, l'education, le sport) et toutes les donnees probantes qui confirment l'importance de programmes d'education physique de qualite, le Canada ne respecte toujours pas ce droit fondamental des enfants et des jeunes qui frequentent nos ecoles. Par consequent, un grand nombre de jeunes Canadiens font face a un avenir marque par des problemes de sante graves qui, en plus de taxer lourdement notre regime de soins de sante, nuira grandement a leur qualite de vie. Cette prise de position s'accompagne d'une serie de recommandations fondees sur des recherches anterieures incitant les decideurs a engager des mesures pour garantir que les programmes d'education physique canadiens engendrent une generation de jeunes qui opteront pour des modes de vie sains et actifs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.393 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue phénEPS / PHEnex JournalSame topicPhysical Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207