Intercollegiate Athletics in Canadian Universities: Perspectives on the Future
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the new millennium begins, we find intercollegiate sport in Canadian universities at a crossroads. Although the Canadian Interuniversity Athletic Union (CIAU), the governing body for university sport in Canada, has a history of recurring issues and challenges, further change is imminent. This paper provides the perspective of two Canadian intercollegiate athletic administrators and sport management academicians on the future of intercollegiate sport in Canada by focusing on five major areas of concern: (a) diversity, (b) governance, (c) funding of athletics, (d) the role and value of athletics, and (e) the changing environmental context of the university. The authors conclude that university sport in Canada will remain embedded within the non-profit, amateur fabric of the Canadian sporting milieu characterized by a participant rather than spectator focus, men's sport domination, decreased funding sources, and pressures to justify its role and value within a rapidly changing environment. The diversity evident throughout the CIAU will continue to have a compelling impact on the organization.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".