An exploration of parent perceptions of a take-home loose parts play kit intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The restrictions introduced in response to the COVID-19 pandemic affected the regular routines of Canadians, including access to play and physical activity opportunities, while limiting social connections. In response to this, a recreation centre created take-home play kits that contained loose parts with the aim of facilitating unstructured play. Between August 2021 and January 2022, ten parents participated in semi-structured interviews via telephone or videoconferencing platforms that captured their experiences of the take-home play kits. Using Thematic Analysis, we identified themes and subthemes reflecting parent perceptions and experiences of the take-home play kit. Three themes emerged: (1 A forced renaissance of play; (2) Bringing unstructured play home, and; (3) Parenting is child's play. Parents shared how the pandemic resulted in decreased physical activity and social opportunities for their children. The parents described how the take-home play kits supported unstructured play as well as their perspectives on the importance of unstructured play. Parents in our study suggested that a take-home loose parts play kit could be a useful resource to help engage children in unstructured play in both indoor and outdoor environments.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".