Gender equity and physical education in BC : re-thinking feminist debates on co-educational versus single-sex classes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this thesis, I examine liberal and radical feminist debates about the merits of using co-educational or single-sex PE as a means to eliminate gender inequity.Drawing on post-structural feminist insights and my own discussions with secondary PE students in BC, I argue that neither setting is inherently gender equitable.Because PE in Western societies is framed in a scientific discourse that naturalizes gender difference and in the ideals of 'hegemonic masculinity' and sport, both classroom strategies result in gender inequity.Instead of focusing on the delivery of PE -whether it is co-education or singlesexthose who are seeking to eliminate gender inequity in PE need to challenge the Western definition of sport and gender.By examining the history of PE in Canada and BC, the PE curriculum in BC, and the experiences of some secondary students in PE, this thesis t;haiienges tire "f gei i &i -as a bi i i ai -y.categ"i-y.ifi& i i i i deri i es gei i &i -i neqi i i i y and the debate about co-educational versus single-sex PE.In particular, in this thesis, I examine how the maintenance of 'hegemonic masculinity' in PE, particularly through its reliance on sport in the curriculum, affects girls who are attempting to maintain an image of 'emphasized femininity' in opposition to physical activity and other girls who are attempting to resist idealized femininity in Western society.As well, I am interested in how PE's reliance on 'hegemonic masculinity' affects those boys who do not adhere to its ideals of competition, physical strength and aggression.In my research, I gave studentswho are the primary people affected by the educational processspace to have their voices heard and to share their experiences in PE.I examined their insights about gender and equity as an essential component for understanding how we can make changes that will allow us to work towards a gender equitable PE. iii I would like to thank my committee for all their time and energy in this thesis, Dr. Arlene McLaren and Dr. Ann Travers.I also wish to thank the school district for allowing me to enter their schools and talk with their students.Further, thank you to the teachers and principals that discussed this research with me and gave me access to their students.I especially want to thank the seven student participants who gave their time and words to this project.Thank you also to
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.053 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".