MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Yoga Comes to American Physical Education: Josephine Rathbone and Corrective Physical Education

2014· article· en· W2282481096 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia Vertinsky

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sport History · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumPhysical educationSociologyHistoryAestheticsPedagogyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Around the turn-of-the-twentieth-century yoga took on an American mantle, developing into India’s first “global brand” of physical culture. Physical educators became implicated in this transnational exchange adopting aspects of yoga into their programs and activities, though there has been an insufficient attempt to piece together the sum and pattern of their intersecting influences. This paper explores how adopted Eastern cultural practices such as yoga gained traction on American shores and entered the fabric of everyday and institutional life, including the curricula of higher education in the late nineteenth and early decades of the twentieth century. It then describes how American physical educator Josephine L. Rathbone came to draw inspiration and knowledge from Indian gurus about the yoga postures she would incorporate in the first and rather significant program of corrective physical education at Teachers College, Columbia University during the 1930s and 1940s. As an early pioneer of the evolution of Ling’s medical gymnastics into a therapeutic stream of physical activity which formed an important branch of physical education, Rathbone was instrumental in maintaining a critical link with physical therapy and medicine, facilitating transnational connections and networks while pushing open a door to mind-body practices from the east. Her project was a small but illuminating aspect of the shifting spaces of “bodies in contact” in cross-cultural encounters and complex imperial networks emerging from “modernities” in both East and West.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.477
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sport HistorySame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207