MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7079792446 · doi:10.26108/3309-1f15

Investigating the feasibility of the Canadian assessment of physical literacy for children with disabilities

2020· article· en· W7079792446 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAcadiaU-DEV · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisCompetence (human resources)Psychomotor learningAutism spectrum disorderLiteracySittingTypically developing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Only nine percent of Canadian youth are currently meeting the recommended 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per day. This number only drops for children with disabilities due to their predisposed difficulties with motor skills and coordination. This study sought out to determine the feasibility of the Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy (CAPL) for children with disabilities. Eleven participants with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), Down Syndrome (DS) and Global Developmental Delay (GDD) underwent the CAPL testing alongside two typically developing participants. The participants completed the Progressive Aerobic Cardiovascular Endurance Run, the Canadian Agility and Movement Skill Assessment and the plank assessment of torso strength in order to determine their physical competence domain score. A qualitative case study approach was utilized to conduct a thematic analysis which highlighted themes within the data. These included adaptations that could be made to the CAPL protocol based on the considerations of Cairney et al.'s (2019) holistic approach to physical literacy in the cognitive, affective and physical domains. More specifically, the results showed that all participants who had their domain score calculated were placed in the beginning category based on the CAPL standards. It also showed that the participants with disabilities had difficulties concentrating on multi step instructions, the DS group displayed hypotonia on the sit and reach task, the participants had difficulties withthe timing factor of the tasks and that the CAPL testing protocol did not fulfill their three innate psychological needs which in turn impacted their engagement in the tasks. Given these results, it can be suggested that adaptations should be made to the protocol to individualize the testing procedure to allow each child to experience success. In conclusion, this study determined that physical literacy testing is feasible for children with varying disabilities when modifications are in place to meet their unique needs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it