MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942935710 · doi:10.1139/apnm-2018-0495

Physical literacy improves with the Run Jump Throw Wheel program among students in grades 4–6 in southwestern Ontario

2019· article· en· W2942935710 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Paige Coyne, Elizabeth Vandenborn, Sara Santarossa, Marcia M. Milne, Kevin Milne, Sarah J. Woodruff

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsGrassrootsTest (biology)Physical educationLong jumpLiteracyPhysical therapyVertical jumpMedicinePsychologyMulti-stage fitness testJumpMathematics educationPhysical fitnessPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the introduction of a fundamental movement skills (FMS) program to grade 4–6 physical education (PE) classes could improve students’ physical literacy (PL) and influence the amount of effort exerted in PE class. Athletics Canada’s grassroots Run Jump Throw Wheel (RJTW) Program was delivered for 10 weeks during PE classes (2 schools: four grade 4, four grade 5, two grade 6, one split grade 5–6 class, and one split grade 6–7 class, totalling 310 students). Participants completed the Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy (CAPL) and wore heart rate monitors and pre- and postintervention. The CAPL score increased 3.3 (±8.8) points from the pretest to the post-test (t = 6.47, p < 0.001). Improvements were not significantly different by grade or gender, but those in the suburban-area school improved more so than those attending the rural-area school (F [1,294] = 4.82, p < 0.004). Among those participants that increased their PL (n = 186), the CAPL scores increased by 8.6 (±5.9) points versus those that decreased (n = 110; –5.6 ± 4.8 points), F [1,294] = 452.11, p < 0.001. No significant differences in time spent in physical activity were observed between the pre- and post-test (i.e., 17.0 ± 7.0 min and 19.3 ± 7.0 min, respectively, t = 1.70, p = 0.091). The RJTW program increased participants’ overall FMS, as well as their knowledge and understanding regarding these FMS, both key components of PL.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score0.734

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations37
Published2019
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physiology Nutrition and MetabolismSame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207