Bibliographic record
Abstract
A looming attrition rate, a steady increase in the number of women in \nadministration, and a lack of Canadian research all provided the rationale for this study. \nThe problem in this study was to investigate the needs and challenges of new female \nadministrators and to examine the role that mentors play in addressing these issues. This \nstudy also explored the perceived benefits of having a mentor. \nThis study examined the inductive year of 33 female administrators from 3 \nOntario school boards. It was a qualitative and quantitative design, using questionnaire \nand interview data. It was found that the majority felt that they struggled with biases and \nexpectations that were gender specific. The challenges that were perceived to be most \nprevalent were categorized into 4 thematic areas: Maintaining Balance, Feeling \nPressured, The Perceptions of Others, and Being Challenged by Others. Regarding the \nbenefits of mentoring, the participants perceived mentoring to be most beneficial in terms \nof professional growth, followed by learning how to run a school, and then career \nadvancement. \nThe significance of this study was threefold: it had theoretical implications as well \nas implications for practice and future research. Suggestions included: facilitating \nlongitudinal relationships, having the board become more actively involved in facilitating \nthe relationship, and implementing an internship program. This study attempted to extend \nthe current literature by theorizing that a mentorship is cyclical in nature. Future research \ncould include program design and implementation, as well as providing consistent and \naccessible mentoring opportunities for all.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".