Mentoring in the Open: A Strategy for Supporting Human Development in the Knowledge Society
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On-line mentoring, or between K-12 students and adult volunteers has proven a valuable way to enable ambitious classroom inquiry. However, past research has shown that simply placing mentoring opportunities at the disposal of all students is not enough to make telementoring effective on an equitable basis. When mentoring relationships are conducted via private media like e-mail, the students who most need to see models of successful mentoring are, in fact, the least likely to encounter them. In the worst case this leads to a rich get richer dynamic, in which only students with previous experience of supportive learning partnerships are able to draw benefit from them. In design experiments conducted in Toronto-area high schools, we orchestrated telementoring relationships in a Knowledge Forum™ database — an asynchronous, electronic group workspace. In this new model of telementoring, students could (and did) peek into the telementoring dialogues of their peers. This opportunistic model-seeking, as we call it, allowed students to develop more sophisticated ideas about the kinds of advice and guidance they wanted from their mentors, defeating the rich get richer dynamic. Our findings suggest that mentoring in the open may serve as a powerful component strategy for building equitable and sustainable on-line learning communities for participants of diverse age and expertise.
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 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 | 0.015 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it