School Travel Planning: Mobilizing School and Community Resources to Encourage Active School Transportation
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: Active school transport (AST), school travel using an active mode like walking, may be important to children's overall physical activity. A "school travel plan" (STP) documents a school's transport characteristics and provides an action plan to address school and neighborhood barriers to AST. METHODS: We conducted a pilot STP intervention at 12 schools in 4 Canadian provinces. Facilitators and school personnel created and implemented AST action plans. Parent's self-reports (N = 1489) were the basis for evaluating the intervention. A content analysis identified type, frequency, and perceived success of initiatives. RESULTS: School travel plans emphasized education and promotion, and AST activities and events. Capital improvement projects were more common at schools in older suburban neighborhoods, whereas enforcement was more common at schools in newer suburban neighborhoods. Rates of active transportation increased from 43.8% to 45.9%. At follow-up, 13.3% of households reported less driving. Parents/caregivers cited weather, convenience, and trip chaining as primary reasons for continued driving. CONCLUSION: The STP process may facilitate changes to patterns of school travel. An STP can expand a school's capacity to address transportation issues through mobilization of diverse community resources. Future STP initiatives may benefit from addressing convenience, safety through enforcement, and by examining how schools can be supported in implementing infrastructure improvements.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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