Bibliographic record
Abstract
Life skills refer to a person’s ability to do life well through the successful completion of everyday tasks and a meaningful engagement at school, at work, at home and in the community. However, several scholars have critiqued existing approaches to life skills teaching in sport, often situated as individualistic and focused on economic productivity and integration in predetermined social orders. For the teaching of life skills in sport to instigate social change, coaching approaches must consider broader structures of power, privilege and oppression. The purpose of the paper is to propose a two continua model coalescing implicit/explicit approaches and normative/transformative dimensions of how coaches can teach life skills through sport. The model is designed to account for how coaches can be implicit or explicit in their approaches to teaching life skills, doing so in manners that can be normative or transformative. Within each of the model’s quarter-circles, examples are offered as to how coaches can teach life skills in approaches considered normative implicit, normative explicit, transformative implicit and transformative explicit. In the transformative explicit quarter-circle, the concept of social justice life skills is expanded to include dignity, reciprocity, transformative leadership and critical consciousness. Implications for research and practice are offered in terms of situating youth development from a relational perspective and positioning transformative change as a complex process that carries certain challenges and risks for coaches and youth. The two continua model for life skills teaching offers researchers and coaches a conceptual framework that delineates actions that can be taken to enact transformative pedagogies, while also opening new horizons for what life skills can become when envisioned with social change in mind.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".