“Dance Isn’t a Sport, It’s for Girls”: Examining the Role of Gender in Interuniversity Sport Participation for Competitive Dancers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the impact of gender in competitive dancers’ access to and recognition within interuniversity sport. We interviewed competitive dancers, dance coaches, and athletic department staff in universities across Ontario, Canada to understand how participants’ roles, prior knowledge and experience with dance and sport, and views on gender may influence their understandings of dance. We examined three themes: (1) dance as dominated by women, (2) gendered dynamics in athletic departments, and (3) the erasure of dancers as athletes. The findings highlight significant biases favoring men’s sports, the disadvantages of dance being understood as “female dominated,” and the ambiguous status of dancers as student-athletes and dance as a sport. Gender biases and societal stereotypes compounded these challenges, further perpetuating inequalities in university athletic departments. This study advocates for systemic changes within athletic departments to create an environment where dancers can not only participate as student-athletes, but be celebrated as true student-athletes.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".