The Intersection of Professional Identity and Gender Representation of Kinesiology in Ontario: A Feminist Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The College of Kinesiologists of Ontario (CKO) oversees professional Kinesiology and its scope of practice. The CKO mandates what is required by and expected of a Professional Kinesiologist (PK) and enjoys full authority from the provincial government regarding the management of Kinesiology. This qualitative study is an in-depth media analysis of the CKO website (https://www.coko.ca/). Employing a critical feminist theoretical lens, I am interested in: how Professional Kinesiology and a PK are represented to the public at large by the CKO?; and if and how the representation(s) of Professional Kinesiology and a PK are gendered and gendering? \nThe data suggests a codependent relationship between Kinesiology and PKs in Ontario that works to enforce and reinforce the legitimization and gendered/gendering aspects of the representation of the profession and professionhood. Furthermore, the gendered/gendering aspects of the representation of Professional Kinesiology and PKs demonstrated an enmeshed sex-gender binary relationship.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".