Ontario elementary school teachers perceptions' of the daily physical activity policy / by Jessica Wiseman.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to explore Ontario elementary school teachers? \nperceptions of the Daily Physical Activity (DPA) policy. The DPA policy was developed \nto help combat the increasing levels of inactivity and obesity with Ontario \nschoolchildren. Since the policy?s introduction in 2005, little or no evaluation has been \nconducted to demonstrate the success or failure of the policy. Furthermore, gaps exist \nin the evaluation of the policy, particularly in regards to the views of the teachers who \nare the individuals responsible for implementing the policy in elementary schools. The \ninterview guide (Appendix A) will invite participants to comment on various aspects of \nthe policy including the participants? personal views, observed responses of teachers, \nparents, and students, challenges, successes and recommendations of future \ndirections. Through this research, a clearer view of the perspectives of teachers of the \npolicy in terms of its successes and challenges is anticipated and a list of suggestions \nor future directions will be determined.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".