MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409060243 · doi:10.3390/educsci15040441

Feelings, Realizations, and Reflections of a Female Physical Education Teacher Confronting Experiences of Institutional(ized) Gender Inequality: An Autoethnography

2025· article· en· W4409060243 on OpenAlexaff
Kathleen J. Lockyer, Daniel B. Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueEducation Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoethnographyFeelingInequalityPsychologyQualitative researchGender studiesSocial psychologySociologyPedagogySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This autoethnographic study intertwines personal experience with scholarly inquiry, inviting a deep exploration of the lived experiences and realities of a female physical education (PE) teacher. Wonderings about identities, conformity to masculine norms, and proving oneself to staff and students led to a review of relevant literature, journal entries, and meaningful conversations with critical friends. Through analysis and coding of emotions and reoccurring events, five themes emerged: male teaching partners and colleagues; student interactions; interactions with parents; administrative and peer support; and outside organizations. The results acknowledge the intricate interplay between self, society, PE environments, and culture. It is our hope that these reflections and realizations will connect with other women (and men) in the PE field and ignite further contemplation, conversation, and action. This, with the goal of contributing to necessary efforts to strive towards more inclusive and empowering experiences for female PE teachers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.225
GPT teacher head0.581
Teacher spread0.356 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducation SciencesSame topicPhysical Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207