Start2Finish Running and Reading Club Research Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report outlines the two studies conducted with the Start2Finish Running and Reading Clubs of Toronto. The purpose of the first study was to gain an understanding of how youth leadership is experienced in youth programming. The purpose of the second study was to gain a better understanding of youth program quality. The studies were conducted with consenting club members and junior coaches that were involved in the club, collecting data through face-to-face interviews and surveys filled out by the participants. For the first study, junior coaches and club members were asked about their general experiences in the program, their interactions with each other and the adult leaders, and perceptions of their development. Findings indicated that through their interactions with the club members, as well as mentoring and guidance that they received from their previous junior coaches as well as previous and current adult coaches, the junior coaches have developed greater confidence in themselves, and attained life skills (e.g. leadership, communication, responsibility). Junior coaches also perceived that they had an influence on youth, by helping, teaching, and supporting them to develop new skills at the club. Club members led by these junior coaches perceived that their leaders helped to facilitate a more engaging environment, however, they attribute their development more to engagement in the activities themselves and the support of their adult leaders. Furthermore, both the junior coaches and the club members expressed how their involvement in the club and their positive interactions with one another helped them develop strong and trusting relationships. The second study involved measuring youth’s perceptions of the quality of the Running and Reading club, the support they receive, their satisfaction of their needs, and their development of positive outcomes. Results indicated that the program provided opportunities for youth in skill-building and building relationships with one another, that youth perceived they received strong support and satisfaction for their psychological needs of competence, relatedness, and autonomy, and the development of positive outcomes such as developing goal setting skills, initiative, and a stronger sense of one’s self. The final section of this report provides recommendations based on the findings from the two studies, such as providing formal training for junior coaches, ways to provide leadership and mentoring opportunities to coaches, strategies to help encourage life skill development and life skill transfer, and strategies to encourage youth voice.
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 | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".