MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131012716 · doi:10.1260/174795408786238489

Participation in Coaching by Canadian Immigrants: Individual Accommodations and Sport System Receptivity

2008· article· en· W2131012716 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lori A. Livingston, Susan Tirone, Emma Smith, A. Jordan Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sports Science & Coaching · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingAmateurImmigrationPrivilege (computing)Ethnic groupPsychologyInclusion (mineral)Focus groupAthletesPublic relationsSocial psychologySociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Little is known about the lived experiences of immigrants as coaches within the amateur sport ranks or about how amateur sport organizations are accommodating the needs of newcomers. The purpose of this study was to qualitatively explore these issues with the assistance of members of the newcomer and minority ethnic communities, and those who work as sport coaches, and administrators in a city in Atlantic Canada. Seventeen individuals participated in one-on-one semi-structured interviews and/or a follow-up focus group interview. Three major themes emerged: Differences in perceived versus expected levels of involvement and the influence of privilege on newcomers' involvement in sport; how to include newcomers in sport and, more specifically, barriers to and responsibility for inclusion in sport and coaching; and how sport organizations can best communicate information to newcomers about coaching opportunities. Barriers to participation in coaching by newcomers appear to be both personal and systemic in nature.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sports Science & CoachingSame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207