The physical literacy for communities project: Year 1 findings and next steps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical literacy is the competence, confidence, motivation, knowledge and understanding necessary for continued engagement in physical activity. Physical Literacy for Communities (PL4C) is a nationwide initiative to bring together key stakeholders in order to develop physically literate communities. Children in two of these communities (South Surrey/White Rock, British Columbia and Hamilton, Ontario) will be evaluated yearly on their physical literacy in order to track the progress of the initiative and identify areas for intervention. Baseline (Year 1) movement competence data from these communities will be presented here. Children 6-8 years of age (n=195; 54% male) completed the PLAYfun assessment of movement competence between October and December 2017. Findings revealed that, on average, participants did not demonstrate movement competence as they scored in the emerging category on the PLAYfun total score and each of the domain scores (running, locomotor, object control upper and lower body, and balance). Moreover, significant differences in competence were present between males and females. Males significantly outperformed females on the PLAYfun total score (t=-3.87, p
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 | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".