MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946557277

Girls just wanna have fun: Understanding the process of implementing a female youth-driven physical activity-based life skills program

2012· article· en· W2946557277 on OpenAlexaff
Corliss Bean, Tanya Halsall, Tanya Forneris

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Exercise, Movement, and Sport (SCAPPS refereed abstracts repository) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPositive Youth DevelopmentCoachingEmpowermentLife skillsPsychologyPhysical educationWrightPersonal developmentMedical educationPedagogyApplied psychologyPolitical scienceDevelopmental psychologyEngineeringMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Girls Just Wanna Have Fun (GJWHF) program is a physical activity-based life skills program that aims to facilitate positive youth development (PYD) outcomes. The format of the GJWHF program was based on Hellison's (1995, 2003, 2011) Teaching Personal and Social Responsibility (TPSR) framework. TPSR was developed from Hellison's work with at-risk youth and uses a strong instructor-participant relationship that allows for the gradual empowerment of youth (Hellison, Martinek, & Walsh, 2008). The main components of the TPSR framework include: (1) Personal Responsibility or Self-Control; (2) Effort; (3) Self-Coaching; (4) Leadership; and (5) Transference. Each of these five components arose as practical programming guidelines that have been shown to lead to positive outcomes (Walsh, Ozaeta, & Wright, 2010). The purpose of this research was to use a mixed-methods approach to understand how well the implementation of the GJWHF program adhered to the TPSR framework and whether this adherence had any impact on PYD outcomes. Results indicated that self-ratings of the five TPSR levels varied throughout the program but showed a gradual upward trend. In addition, interviews indicated that the youth perceived the program as one that is helping them be more responsible and to develop into leaders. This process evaluation represents an important step in understanding the process in which PYD programs, specifically those utilizing the TPSR framework, can be effectively implemented.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Exercise, Movement, and Sport (SCAPPS refereed abstracts repository)Same topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207