“A place where kids like me can be ourselves”: Exploring the meaning of summer camp with adolescents with neurobiological disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recreational opportunities are valuable opportunities for physical, social, and emotional development. Summer camp provides youth with the chance to be outside among their peers and learn through play. Unfortunately, social, physical, and institutional barriers often result in the exclusion of high-needs individuals with neurobiological disorders from these camp opportunities and experiences. This research used a qualitative photovoice methodology in order to explore what summer camp means to adolescents with neurobiological disorders. Teens aged 14-17 at Camp Neuro, a sleepaway summer camp in Ontario, were invited to take photographs of things that were meaningful to them (n=23) followed by an individual interview to contextualise the photographs (n=13). Results suggest that the physical, social, and emotional camp environments are important to youth with neurobiological disorders. Additionally, the opportunity to learn at summer camp was a recurring theme as teens discussed learning skills, learning to make friends, and learning broad life lessons. Overall, the results suggest that youth with neurobiological are successful at summer camp and value their experiences when they are provided with appropriate accommodations and support. Ultimately, the participants expressed that Camp Neuro supported them to ha to be themselves, try new things, and make friends.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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".