‘I feel like we finally matter’: the role of youth-led approaches in enhancing leisure-induced meaning-making among youth at risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore how engaging youth at risk through a youth-led approach to recreation and leisure programming can contribute to leisure-induced meaning-making. Seven women (four youth at risk [18–22 years] and three adult recreation practitioners) participated in one-on-one semi-structured interviews. Data were also generated via observation and field notes. A three-phase process of content analysis was used to analyse findings. Findings suggest that youth-led approaches to recreation and leisure programming can contribute to leisure-induced meaning-making by: (a) supporting interests and endeavours; (b) connecting to community; (c) overcoming barriers, together; (d) co-creating safe spaces to be engaged; and (e) developing personal and collective positive outcomes. This research makes theoretical contributions to the leisure literature and provides essential insights regarding proactive engagement of youth at risk and meaning-making for practitioners and policy makers from a practical perspective.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".