PERCEPTIONS OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT THROUGH SPORT: A CASE STUDY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO MEN’S AND WOMEN’S BASKETBALL TEAMS (1965-1970)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to gain insight into the effect of participation in intercollegiate sport on the leadership success of former student-athletes who played intercollegiate basketball for The University of Western Ontario between 1965 and 1970. Thirty participants from these teams, twenty men and ten women, completed semi- structured interviews as part of a qualitative retrospective study on their intercollegiate experiences and their work and life since then. Participants believed that on reflection, playing intercollegiate sport prepared them for leadership success in work and life. The intercollegiate atmosphere, their teammates, and the coaching staff exposed the participants to teachable leadership behaviours which were further fostered through the opportunity to utilize these behaviours and reflect upon the lessons learned from their experiences. Results suggest that intercollegiate sport is a fertile ground for leadership development for student-athletes - both formal leaders and informal leaders alike - that endures beyond the sport environment.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".