Engaging Inuit youth in hockey: A pathway to positive youth development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Integrating a positive youth development framework into sport has become popular, as using sport as a vehicle to facilitate physical and psychosocial skills allows for a potential dually productive environment to exist (Côté et al., 2008). The Nunavik Youth Hockey Development Program (NYHDP) has taken a similar approach to PYD by offering a proactive community-based hockey program for Inuit youth in Nunavik as many problems that youth often encounter are heightened in Inuit communities (Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, 2009; MELS du Québec, 2004). This research examined how the NYHDP impacted the psychosocial development of youth participants. Mixed-methods were used including semi-structured interviews with various stakeholders, participant observation, and quantitative measures including modified versions of the Learning Climate Questionnaire (LCQ) and the Developmental Assets Profile (DAP). Results from the LCQ and DAP were quite high, yet showed minimal change from beginning to end of the program. In the interviews the youth highlighted learning how to work as a team, never giving up, and always doing one’s best. Additionally, transfer of such life skills were observed as the program intentionally provides a variety of opportunities in which the youth can transfer the learned skills. Overall, the NYHDP was seen to be having a positive impact on the region of Nunavik. This study served as the first formal evaluation of the NYHDP and aids in understanding what impact the program has on youth participants and the Nunavik region as a whole.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".