MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611451191

INTERPRETATION OF PROCESSES IN DEVELOPING A NEW PROVINCIAL EDUCATION POLICY TO INCREASE STUDENT PHYSICAL ACTIVITY

2009· dissertation· en· W2611451191 on OpenAlex
Rebecca Lynn Wiebe

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2009
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Training Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretation (philosophy)Mathematics educationPhysical educationPhysical activityPolitical sciencePedagogyPsychologyComputer scienceMedicinePhysical therapyProgramming language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Significant efforts have been made to address childhood obesity. Overtime we have realized obesity requires strong political leadership and population level interventions, considering there are many environmental factors contributing to obesity. Stakeholders in Manitoba have created a policy that in combination with other initiatives is attempting to increase physical activity and in turn combat the obesity epidemic. Therefore the objective of this study was to understand the complexities involved with developing an innovative policy. Results from this study would refine our understanding on how policy is enacted, provide information on the support for and resistance of policies for decision makers in the future, and contribute an historical record to Manitoba stakeholders. Mobilizing these context-specific findings will inform other Canadian provinces or jurisdictions on how to develop, integrate and implement a similar policy. 
\n
\nMethods: This study employed a retrospective single case study design. Twelve participants were purposively selected from provincial and local-levels and invited to participate in a 45 minute semi-structured telephone interview examining the developmental processes involved in the Physical Education/Health Education policy. The data consisted of two sources. The primary sources consisted of 9 interview transcripts and the secondary sources consisted of several important documents that assisted filling in gaps pertaining to the policy. Qualitative analyses were separated into two parts. The first part identified common themes from the interview transcripts, and the second part organized the data into stages from an existing model for analysis. 
\n
\nResults: The analysis identified several influential factors that facilitated moving the policy process forward. More specifically, the factors existing between the Policy Formulation and Implementation stages were critically analyzed revealing collaboration and on-going communication as important features for developing and implementing policies. The Stages Model proved to be relatively uninformative yielding minimal information to understanding the policy process. Therefore researchers should seek out additional theories or models in future research. 
\n
\nConclusions: The findings from this research project have contributed valuable knowledge and insights. Lessons learned from this project will assist future decision makers on how to develop and implement a similar policy in another province or jurisdiction.

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 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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.608
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.359 · 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