Evaluation of Girls Rock: An Intervention Program for Girls in Grades 4, 5 and 6
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are many benefits associated with physical activity, such as physical health and improved psychological development. Even with a substantial amount of documented benefits, the majority of youth are not meeting the recommended levels of physical activity, especially girls who are globally less active than boys. One way to improve specific needs of girls is through classroom and activity community-based programs, such as the eight-week program, Girls Rock. Girls Rock consisted of 23 girls in Grades 4, 5 and 6, from four different Boys and Girls Club locations, with the objectives of increasing positive body image, self-esteem, self-efficacy and fundamental movement skills. The present research study conducted an outcome evaluation to assess the effectiveness of Girls Rock in achieving its objectives. Data collected pre- and post-intervention, through questionnaires and observational assessment, revealed that participation in Girls Rock significantly increased positive body image, self-esteem, and self-efficacy, and partially increased fundamental movement skills. This information can be used to attain the future goals of recruiting more participants, retaining those already involved, and expanding to other clubs. It is important that Girls Rock continues to be evaluated to ensure the program's objectives are being met, and to discover ways to improve Girls Rock. Furthermore, Girls Rock, and intervention programs alike, is critical because it provides young girls the education required to increase key variables in their lives, which carry on until adulthood.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".