Helping Internationally-Trained Professionals Make the Transition to New Careers in Canada: A case study of the S.U.C.C.E.S.S. Employment Mentoring Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The research reported in this thesis explored the career development and mentoring expectations of recent immigrants in the category of Internationally-Trained Professionals (ITPs) who were currently living in British Columbia (B.C.), Canada. Previous research has found that mentoring can improve employment outcomes for skilled immigrants; however, the majority of previous research studies have been based on quantitative methods and do not provide a holistic view of the mentoring experience. The research reported for this thesis was the result of a case study examining the experiences of a group of ITPs and their mentors involved in an Employment Mentoring Program (EMP) offered by the United Chinese Community Enrichment Services Society (S.U.C.C.E.S.S.) in Vancouver, B.C. The research design was theoretically framed by Kram’s (1985) construct of the career and psychosocial elements of mentoring and employed a mixed method design involving an online survey and personal interviews with the mentees and mentors in the EMP. The study also elicited four rich narratives from mentees describing their job search experiences since coming to Canada. The study found that the psychosocial and career functions were complementary elements of the mentoring relationship - a perspective extended by several specific results. First, with the support of their mentors, the mentees met directly with local professionals having similar qualifications and extended their social networks. Second, the mentors provided encouragement and helped the mentees to advance their job search skills. Third, both mentors and mentees agreed that the mentoring experience was enjoyable and that the program was helpful in their search both for employment and effective participation in Canadian society. The participants also identified some program challenges including a lack of consistent funding and an insufficient number of organisations willing to participate by offering practicums (work placement) or job shadowing opportunities to the newcomers. It is recommended that the findings be reviewed by stakeholders and policy-makers in order to improve future mentoring programs and employment policies focused on ITPs in Canada.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".