Exploring the Experiences of a Gender Equity Program in the Disability Sport Context From the Perspective of Sport Leaders and Program Facilitators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2019, the Government of Canada announced their goal of achieving gender equity in sport by 2035; and since then, numerous organizations have worked to create sport programming to increase the participation and retention of girls and women. It is currently unknown how these programs serve the needs of girls and women with disabilities who may experience sport differently due to their intersecting identities. This study explored the experiences of a national gender equity program within the disability sport context from the perspective of sport leaders and program facilitators. We recruited three Para sport or integrated sport programs from across Canada. Four sport leaders and two program facilitators voluntarily participated. Sport leaders completed three online journals over the course of the program to document “in-the-moment” reflections, and following completion, sport leaders and program facilitators engaged in individual interviews. We analyzed our data using a reflexive thematic analysis and found that participants enhanced their understanding of gender equity in the disability sport setting as a result of engaging in the program, identified diverse challenges that girls and women athletes with disabilities experienced that prevented or hindered the quality of their sport participation, and implemented tailored strategies to promote the recruitment and retention of this population in sport. This study provides a first step into showcasing how gender equity programs can promote intersectional understanding and awareness to sport leaders who can ultimately provide a safer and more inclusive sport environment for girls and women athletes with disabilities.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".