MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034332674 · doi:10.1080/17460263.2020.1755889

‘A singularly gifted man’: A. D. ‘Dave’ Munrow and academic physical education at the University of Birmingham

2020· article· en· W3034332674 on OpenAlexafffund
Patricia Vertinsky

Bibliographic record

VenueSport in History · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReputationPhysical educationSubject (documents)PedagogySociologySocial scienceLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT‘I think our subject can light up one facet which universities in their very nature sometimes fail to see’, said A.D. ‘Dave’ Munrow in his career-long quest to make physical education a subject worthy of study at Birmingham University. This paper follows Munrow’s efforts in early post- war Britain to forge a Department of Physical Education that welcomed scientific enquiry and articulated new approaches to the training of sports skills and techniques while guarding against a cleavage between the sciences and humanities. Female students were admitted to the programme from its inception even while he challenged the emphasis of women’s physical education colleges upon movement education and generalised skill training. His programme was well established by the time Franklin Henry at the University of California, Berkeley outlined the body of knowledge acceptable in a physical education degree, as was his substantial reputation on the international stage of physical education and sport, and as one of Britain’s leading architects of sport. Upon his early death in 1975 he was eulogised as ‘a genial spirit with a talent for subjecting views to critical examination’. ‘In the field of physical education’, said Walter Winterbottom, ‘Dave Munrow was a singularly gifted man’.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSport in HistorySame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207