Black Women Coaches in Community: Promising Practices for Mentorship in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mentorship programs have been shown to help under-represented women navigate their environments, but little research has been done on mentorship programs in sport coaching in Canada. The first of its kind in Canada, the Black Female Coach Mentorship Program (BFCMP) created by the Black Canadian Coaches Association in partnership with the Coaching Association of Canada caters to an historically excluded population: Black, Biracial, and Indigenous women coaches. The research aimed to understand the experiences of program participants to better inform policy, decision-making, and sustainability of the BFCMP. Through mentorship session observations, one-on-one semi-structured interviews with 15 of the 27 inaugural BFCMP mentors and mentees, and thematic analysis, we determined the ability to form a trusted community was a promising practice for coach mentorship programs. Our findings suggest that participants, the majority of whom were the only Black woman coach in their program/institution, benefit from mentorship because of the opportunities to help each other develop as leaders, build relationships to resist loneliness, and nurture resilience through community.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.037 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".