MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How Career Influencers Can Promote Sustainable Careers and the Wellbeing of Underrepresented Students

2023· book-chapter· en· W4379046342 on OpenAlexaff
Candy Ho, Candace Stewart-Smith, Dinuka Gunaratne

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in higher education and professional development book series · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Practises and Engagement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of the Fraser Valley
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfluencer marketingCareer developmentCareer educationCognitive Information ProcessingPsychologyCareer portfolioMandateMedical educationIndigenousPedagogyVocational educationPolitical scienceMarketingBusinessMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most students pursuing postsecondary education have a primary goal of attaining gainful employment and enhancing their career prospects. Yet postsecondary career centers, whose mandate is to serve all students and sometimes alums, are often under-resourced, especially when it comes to providing catered support for underrepresented students. By the same token, students also prefer to turn to career influencers: postsecondary professionals with whom they regularly interact but work outside of career centers and might not have career development expertise. Though they informally support student career development, career influencers are trusted members within students' career ecosystems who contribute to student wellbeing, career, and lifelong success. This chapter examines career realities and challenges experienced by three underrepresented student populations (international students, students with disabilities, and Indigenous students) and offers recommendations on leveraging career influencers to sustain students' career ecosystems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.005

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in higher education and professional development book seriesSame topicHigher Education Practises and EngagementFrench-language works237,207