MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915448206 · doi:10.1080/13573322.2019.1582478

‘Strong girls’ in physical education: opportunities for social justice education

2019· article· en· W2915448206 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicole Cameron, Louise Humbert

Bibliographic record

VenueSport Education and Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhysical educationDisengagement theoryEthnographySociologyGender studiesHegemonySocial justiceSocial classFeminismCritical ethnographyPsychologySocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPedagogySocial sciencePolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many girls become disengaged from physical education (PE) and physical activity as they reach late elementary and high school years. While strategies to engage girls in PE exist, strategies addressing the social constructions of gender as the root of disengagement from PE are rarely discussed. Using results from a broader feminist ethnographic study, this article explores the notion of ‘strong girls’ within one middle school PE class. Using the perspectives of the students and their teachers, I engage in a discussion of hegemonic gender stereotypes, competitive PE environments, and close female friendships as hindering and promoting the strength of girls in PE. The ability of participants to easily recognize, name, and begin to act on gendered inequities within their PE class leads to a recommendation for the use of critical social justice education in middle school PE.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0110.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.145
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations32
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSport Education and SocietySame topicPhysical Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207