Investigating the feasibility of the Canadian assessment of physical literacy for children with disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.014 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".