Enhancing the sport experiences of Indigenous youth through participation in traditional games
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A well-documented need exists for sport policies, programs, and initiatives that are inclusive of Indigenous peoples in Canada. Though little published research has focused on traditional sporting activities (i.e., traditional games), they may play a particularly unique role in supporting positive sport experiences among Indigenous youth. The purpose of this community-based participatory research was to better understand how participation in traditional games can enhance the sport experiences of Indigenous youth. The integrated Indigenous-ecological model, as described by Lavallée and Lévesque (2013), is a contextually and culturally relevant model that provided a theoretical framework for this research. Eighteen Indigenous youth (Y = 8; ages 14-18 years) and adults (A = 10) living in various communities in the Northwest Territories, Canada participated in this research. Data was generated via one-on-one interviews or talking circles, and was analyzed using the three-step process of content analysis as described by Elo and Kyngäs (2008). The words of participants suggest that participating in traditional games can enhance the sport experiences of Indigenous youth by: (1) promoting cultural pride, (2) interacting with Elders, (3) supporting connection to the land, (4) developing personal characteristics, and (5) developing a foundation for movement. Findings from this research contribute to a necessary knowledge base that can serve as a foundation for beginning to address Sport Canada's stated goals to enhance the participation of Indigenous peoples in sport.Acknowledgments: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".