Game Changers: A participatory action research project for/with students with disabilities in school sport settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Although school communities may be required to provide physical education opportunities for all students—including for those with disabilities—the same is not generally true with respect to school sport (i.e., participation in interscholastic or intramural sport programs). Hence, opportunities for inclusive school sport participation are consequently limited. Recognizing the need for continued attention and action in this area, we recently developed and piloted Game Changers—a participatory action research project. Together, 27 students with various cognitive and/or intellectual disabilities (i.e., student-participants), their schools’ six physical education teachers and learning support teachers (i.e., champion-participants), four university researchers (i.e., researcher-participants), and two community partners [i.e., Physical and Health Education (PHE) Canada, Special Olympics Nova Scotia] engaged in the Game Changers project with three idealized goals: (a) to bring to the fore para/adapted/inclusive sport opportunities for all students; (b) to provide an empowering opportunity for students with disabilities to participate, make choices, and act as leaders in the development of sport programming; and (c) to engage youth with disabilities in sport as participants, leaders, mentors, and role models. Methods Utilizing a mixed-methods design, data were collected from a variety of sources before the implementation of the Game Changers program, during its implementation, and once it was complete. These four data sources included the following: pre- and post-program survey for student-participants, pre- and post-program focus group interviews for student-participants, pre- and post-program focus group interviews for champion-participants, and school/sport observations. Results The first cycle of this participatory action research project has yielded positive and informative findings. Strictly positive findings, among others, relate to the following: improving upon students' perceived competence and autonomy, inviting student voice, identifying and responding to sport participation barriers, and creating genuine sport opportunities within school settings. More undesirable yet informative findings, among others, relate to the following: unachieved intrinsic motivation and belonging, (un)sustainability of sport programs without “interventions” like Game Changers, recreation/leisure as “substitutes” for sport, and a continued want for authentic leadership and mentorship opportunities. Discussion With these findings, we offer insights for future iterations of Game Changers (and programs like it) in similar school communities.
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 | 0.035 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".