Play: Fostering relationships that inspire positive change in young people’s meaningful participation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite play’s recognition in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) and evidence that play is beneficial to children’s development, and a vehicle to support realization of other children’s rights, it is one of the most neglected rights of the child. An overarching devalue of play has implications on its relationship with children’s participation rights and correspondingly the realization of young people’s meaningful participation. This article explores the interplay between the right to play and children’s participation rights. Drawing upon a participatory play-based research qualitative study with young people at a youth-driven child rights workshop entitled XXXX and interviews with adults, the article considers the role of play in relational development for meaningful participation, as well as the devalue of play across young people and adults. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of findings and provides recommendations for the role of play to co-create transformative participatory environments in research, policy, and programs.
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 | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".