Transformational Mentoring Experiences for First Nations Young People: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While Aboriginal youth mentoring has been used as a teaching process for thousands of years and the tradition continues, little attention has been paid to documenting what elements make learning experiences transformational. As part of the evaluation of the Aldara Yenara mentoring program, this Aboriginal-led scoping review examined literature about transformational mentoring programs from Canada, Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand to understand their key elements and provide guidance for future research and practice. The use of relational mapping was applied in an attempt to locate literature written by Aboriginal scholars including grey literature. Twenty-seven documents were reviewed including 20 from the peer-reviewed literature and seven acquired through the relational mapping. A total of 13 met the inclusion criteria, predominantly written by non-Aboriginal authors. Four distinct themes emerged and informed our narrative synthesis. Absent in this material, largely neither led nor owned by Aboriginal people, was any reference to connection to Country as central to Aboriginal transformational healing programs. Without Aboriginal leadership, communication and processes in these programs, there was a failure to draw on Aboriginal understandings of healing spaces. From here on in, research and practice in this area must be Aboriginal-led to ensure deeper, Aboriginal-informed understandings for First Nations transformational mentoring programs.IMPLICATIONS Existing youth mentoring literature is dominated by western understandings and perceptions. Thus, it often fails to offer the nuanced benefits of Aboriginal youth holding or growing their relationship to Country for their wellbeing and personal developmentMentoring programs that are culturally strong from First Nations worldviews are key to providing transformational experiences: that is, cultural connectedness encourages, motivates, and creates healing spaces for Aboriginal youthWhile social work has facilitated normative western narratives for youth and their wellbeing, future Aboriginal mentoring program need to be both led and evaluated by First Nations people.
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 | 0.017 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".