MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7139493286

A Broken Promise: Educational Neglect in Major Junior Hockey

2025· dissertation· W7139493286 on OpenAlexaffabout
Thomas Leaf

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2025
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueIce hockeyNeglectPrestigeThematic analysisEliteEducational researchAthletesPerception
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the 1960s, concerns have been raised about the educational experiences of elite Canadian hockey players. Researchers have identified several contributing factors to the de-prioritization of education among players, including relocation, intensive training schedules, and the commercialization of sport. This thesis aimed to understand the educational experiences of former Canadian Hockey League (CHL) players, exploring how junior hockey shaped their academic engagement. Eight former CHL players (aged 25-28) participated in one semi-structured interview, with data analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s (2016) thematic analysis. The findings reaffirmed that relocation, demanding schedules, and commercial pressures interfered with participants’ abilities to prioritize education. Additionally, there was a prevailing ‘hockey first, education second’ approach, driven by the perceived prestige of the CHL and an anti-education culture perpetuated by stakeholders within the CHL. Interpreted through the lenses of exceptionalism and child labour, CHL players experience unique academic accommodations that may constitute educational neglect.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.671
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0260.021
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)→Same topicSports, Gender, and Society→French-language works237,207→