MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412625903 · doi:10.1080/17408989.2025.2536143

On the other side of advocacy: stories from non-physical education decision-makers

2025· article· en· W4412625903 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lila J. Berg, Hayley Morrison, Matthew Franko, Doug Gleddie, Lauren Sulz

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Education and Sport Pedagogy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFar side of the MoonPolitical sciencePsychologySociologyPublic relationsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Advocacy skills are essential for physical educators who work in a marginalized subject and often require specialized equipment for successful programming. However, stories and experiences from those individuals being advocated to by physical educators is limited in the literature. Therefore, to better understand strategies for effective advocacy in PE and how physical educators might approach advocacy efforts within schools, administration and decision-makers’ perspectives need to be explored.Study aims: The following study explored: What are the experiences and perceptions of three non-physical educator decision-makers around physical educators’ advocacy efforts? The study aimed to learn from decision-makers’ experiences in order to improve advocacy efforts amongst physical educators.Methods: Narrative inquiry was used to understand three educational leaders’ experiences about their perspectives on how physical educators can more effectively advocate for PE in schools. The decision-makers were from one school district in western Canada. The participants’ experiences were gathered over a two-month period through a chronological timeline and open conversations. The data was analyzed using narrative inquiry methods of retroactive and continuous reflection on the data. Narrative accounts were created to understand the participants’ experiences in relation to the three-dimensional narrative spaces: personal/social, temporal, and place. The participants’ experiences were then analyzed in comparison to one another to establish resonating threads.Results: Three threads in relation to decision-makers’ experiences about PE advocacy in schools were identified to support physical educator advocacy: (a) big picture thinking skills, (b) open-minded attitude, and (c) teacher passion, paired with an empathetic approach.Conclusion: The findings identify a need for more structured and empathetic approaches to advocacy. Preliminary advocacy strategies are offered in response to the findings of this study alongside effective strategies from the literature. More research is needed to examine the efficacy of these strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.448 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Education and Sport PedagogySame topicPhysical Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207