MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013689708 · doi:10.5539/elt.v13n4p140

Mentoring Matters in Workplace: The Impact of Formal Mentoring Program on EFL Instructors’ Performance at ELI, King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia

2020· article· en· W3013689708 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Teacher Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyProfessional developmentMedical educationPedagogyIdentity (music)Faculty developmentInstitutionSociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An unprecedented acceleration in globalization, cross-culture integration and intensified innovation are a few elements that have triggered the need for availability of mentoring as the professional identity of any institution of higher learning. It has got the status of a foundation stone of mutual accomplishments between universities in the provision of teacher development. Therefore, this research study was carried out to evaluate the experiences of faculty members who participated in a formal mentoring program organized by the English Language Institute (ELI) at King Abdulaziz University (KAU) from 2017 to 2019. In this mixed-method study, a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews were used to gather data in order to respond to questions connected to the effectiveness of the mentoring program for mentors and mentees. The study particularly sought to discover the character of the work issues discussed and the worth judged by participants as emerging from their contribution to a programmed mentoring correlation. Data analysis transpired that mentoring promoted all of those who participated in the program. The study concluded that mentoring could assist in constructing capability in two ways: featured and standardized mentoring of trainee teachers through overt mentoring practices, and demonstrating and deconstructing teaching methods and practices for mentors' pedagogical progression. This study emphasizes the worth and value of the formal mentoring program as a valued and fitting professional development approach. 

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.269 · 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