Frenemies, Wannabies and Jocks: navigating the physical cultural capital ladder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research explored the dynamic landscape of high school physical education, a setting aimed to equip students with the competence and confidence needed to live a physically active lifestyle. Despite its recognized role in promoting daily physical activity among boys (Tanaka et al., 2018), a significant knowledge gap persists regarding the specific factors influencing their enjoyment and active participation in physical education classes. Using a retrospective qualitative descriptive approach, this study examined the high school physical education experiences of 10 male-identifying students at the University of Saskatchewan. Guided by the concept of physical cultural capital (Jachyra, 2014), the research employed two rounds of in-depth, semi-structured interviews to unpack these complex experiences. Findings revealed that physical cultural capital – embodied through traits such as competitiveness, involvement in community hockey or school football, and physical attributes – played a central role in shaping boys’ experiences in physical education. These findings aligned with previous research (Jachyra, 2014) while addressing a notable gap in understanding boys’ participation in physical education, offering valuable insights for future exploration in this under-researched area.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".