Benefits of a female coach mentorship programme on women coaches’ development: an ecological perspective
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
The development of women coaches is complex and dependent upon influences at individual, interpersonal, organisational, and sociocultural levels, as outlined by the Ecological-Intersectional Model (EIM). Mentorship is a notable strategy for supporting the development and advancement of women coaches, yet we know little about the benefits of mentorship for women coaches at each of these levels. The purpose of this study was to gain an ecological understanding of the benefits of mentorship for advancing women in coaching. More specifically, this study sought to explore the benefits of a Female Coach Mentorship Program on the various levels of the EIM model. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven women mentee coaches and a qualitative thematic analysis of the data revealed benefits of mentorship at the individual and interpersonal levels but not at the organisational and sociocultural levels. Recommendations are made to advance mentorship with further attention on the macro-levels of sport.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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