Ideologies of "Greatnessâ and the Producion of Space and Subjects: A Study of the Goldring Centre for High Performance Sport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis is a study of a contemporary space at the University of Toronto: The Goldring Centre for High Performance Sport (GCHPS). The motto for the GCHPS was “Pursue (your) Greatness”. I explored the ways in which greatness may be connected to the research and practices of the exercise sciences, sports medicine, and athletics. I drew on the theoretical insights of Lefebvre (1991), and scholars of space and sport (e.g., Pronger, 2001; Atkinson, 2009; van Ingen, 2003; Fusco, 2005). I explain the Centre’s ties to the University’s institutional vision for academic and athletic excellence, as well as the provincial and federal government’s investment in sport. I argue that this production is tied to legacies of classism, whiteness, and scientific knowledge/power, and is neglectful of the interests of the broader university community. I conclude by suggesting that scholars must be critical of the socio-cultural and political aspects of spaces and disciplines.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.064 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".