The Okanagan Charter: Evolution of Health Promotion in Canadian Higher Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper traces the history of health promotion on campuses, including the initial attempts at providing oversight over student behaviour to the increased need for further supports after the influx of World War II veterans onto campuses, to the focus on providing a much broader range of supports that consider well-being from a holistic stance. We describe the current context where campuses are beginning to take a more intentional and organized approach to well-being across Canada; for context, we have included a description of our recent study that explores impactful practices on Health Promotion campuses that have implemented the Okanagan Charter (2015) (Authors, in press). The immediate context with the evolving global pandemic, reliance on online learning, emphasis on diversity and increasing access for all will also be explored. Lastly, we suggest future directions for campuses to take to address the current pressures and how a network of campuses engaged in well-being efforts who are employing whole systems approaches can be a hopeful model for ensuring well-being on Canadian campuses in the future.
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 | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".