Missed Opportunities for Critical Consciousness in Canadian High School Coaching: An Exploratory Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OttawaHigh school sport coaches are important non-parental sources of influence who can help adolescent athletes develop in and beyond sport. In light of recent social movements that have led citizens to organize in the name of social change, there is a need to examine how coaches can leverage high school sport to foster athlete development in manners that address social inequity and promote social justice. In the present exploratory case study, one coach’s attitudes on social justice in Canadian high school sport are explored. Two semi-structured interviews were conducted with the coach participant and subjected to a reflexive thematic analysis. Findings highlight how the coach was in the process of further developing critical consciousness surrounding his coaching yet relied mainly on a reactive approach when addressing social justice issues, resulting in missed opportunities for displaying and/or developing critical consciousness. Using a critical positive youth development framework (CPYD; Gonzalez et al., 2020), practical considerations and reflections are offered in terms of how youth sport coaches can be better trained to proactively address social justice issues through sport. Future directions for research in the Canadian high school sport context related to social justice are also discussed.
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.054 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".