MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160196108 · doi:10.1123/iscj.2014-0103

Coaching and Coach Education in Brazil

2014· article· en· W2160196108 on OpenAlexaff
Michel Milistetd, Pierre Trudel, Isabel Mesquita, Juarez Vieira do Nascimento

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Sport Coaching Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersAustralian Government
KeywordsCoachingBachelorCurriculumGovernment (linguistics)Perspective (graphical)Work (physics)Medical educationPhysical educationPedagogyPsychologyPublic relationsSociologyPolitical scienceMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brazil, contrary to the situation in many countries, sport coaching at all levels is considered a profession. Following a law passed by the government, those who want to coach are required to earn a university diploma called a ‘Bachelor in Physical Education’. This bachelor’s degree prepares future professionals to work in any of the following areas: health, leisure, and sport performance. Because universities have some fexibility regarding the courses that they offer and can also focus on one or any combination of the three aforementioned areas, we cannot assume that graduate students have acquired the same knowledge and developed the same competencies. Therefore, a broad inquiry of what is provided by different universities was needed to create a picture of the curriculum that future sport coaches will experience. In an effort to situate the Brazilian coaching and coach education system within a worldwide perspective, the data collected are interpreted using the International Sport Coaching Framework (ISCF).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations80
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Sport Coaching JournalSame topicSport Psychology and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207