The health and educational impact of removing financial constraints for school sport
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Financial barriers often restrict sport participation among children from low-income families. Schools are thought to offer equitable access to programming, including school sport participation. However, pay-to-play school sport models can inhibit participation among students from low-income households. Recognizing the potential benefits of school sport and realizing the financial barriers to participation, the purpose of this study was to understand the extent to which school sport promotes educational experiences and holistic well-being of Canadian youth from low-income families. A case study was conducted with stakeholders who were supported by funding from a non-profit organization to help cover the costs of school sport registration fees. Data were collected from in-depth interviews with low-income students and their parents, teacher-coaches and school administrators. Three overarching themes were representative of the experiences of school sport participation among low-income students: (1) healthy student-athletes, (2) developing student-athletes in school, for life, and (3) supporting student-athletes as a community. The participants perceived that school sport participation offered holistic health benefits, and developed skills and behaviours that support positive educational experiences and foster life skills. Further, our results highlighted the importance of the school community in supporting low-income students to participate in school sport teams and the need to reframe school sport to better support low-income families.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it