Recruiting and Retaining Canadian Minor Hockey Players by Local Youth Club Hockey Organizations, Canada’s Governing Hockey Organizations, Major Junior, and Intercollegiate Hockey Organizations: Exploring Canada’s Elite Level Hockey Development System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are two pivotal transition points for Canadian elite level minor hockey players and parents; the first transitional point is when a Canadian player and parent is transitioning from the Peewee (11-12 years old) level to the Bantam (13-14 years old) level, and must decide whether to try out for club level hockey or continue to play at a house league level. The second transitional point is between the ages 14 to 16 years old where a Canadian elite level player and parent has three pathways to choose from: the Canadian Hockey League (CHL), Canadian Interuniversity Sport (CIS), and/or National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I hockey. Therefore, the purpose of this dissertation is to explore the strategies, processes, and support mechanism implemented by local youth hockey clubs, Canadian governing hockey bodies, Major Junior, and Intercollegiate hockey organizations (henceforth, Hockey Organizations) in Canada and United States with respect to the recruitment and retention of the most talented elite level hockey players in Canada’s Elite Level Hockey Development System (CELHDS). The methods of data collection used were interviews and secondary sources (e.g., documents). Interviews were conducted with representatives from local youth hockey clubs from Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, and the governing hockey bodies in Canada and Alberta; along with the experts who have a direct knowledge and experience with the CHL, CIS, and the NCAA. A three study format was used for this dissertation; the first study explored the player retention strategies and regulations that can be influential in a player’s and parent’s decision regarding trying out for club level hockey or continuing with community level hockey. The second study explored club hockey manager’s recruiting, hiring, and retaining processes to have the most qualified coach to represent the club hockey organization. The final study examined the CHL, CIS, and NCAA support mechanisms provided to their member organizations for the recruitment of Canadian minor hockey players. Based on the findings from the three case studies, management of the Hockey Organizations take a professional approach to the recruitment and retention of the most talented Canadian elite level minor hockey players.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".