MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114004838 · doi:10.22329/jtl.v14i1.6255

Cross-cultural mentoring

2020· article· en· W3114004838 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Helen J. DeWaard, Rekha Chavhan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Teaching and Learning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Education and Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMentorshipProfessional developmentOpen educational resourcesTacit knowledgePedagogyFaculty developmentOpen learningOpen educationSociologyEducational technologyKnowledge managementEngineering ethicsPsychologyMedical educationEngineeringTeaching methodCooperative learningComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper offers insight from an informal cross-cultural mentoring experience of course development in higher education framed by the UNESCO Chair on Open Technologies for Open Educational Resources and Open Learning project. The Open Education for a Better World is a tuition-free international online mentoring program established to unlock the potential of open education in achieving the United Nation Sustainable Development Goals. Drawing from mentor/protégé conversations and reflections, and examining the experiences of mentoring in the development of an online course for Indian teacher education faculty development, the authors illuminate a pathway toward building professional relationships and professional learning beyond borders and boundaries. This paper describes how mentorship can develop digital competencies foundational for transferring tacit knowledge about planning, designing, recording, implementing, and evaluating teaching and learning in education. Explicit knowledge-building for professional learning within a supportive mentoring relationship is explored.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.009
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0020.023
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.360 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Teaching and LearningSame topicInnovative Education and Learning PracticesFrench-language works237,207