MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405943329 · doi:10.1080/21683565.2024.2445741

From learner to leader: exploring learning, motivations, and roles of regenerative grazing mentors

2024· article· en· W4405943329 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Brooke McWherter, Kate Sherren, Arora Hunar

Bibliographic record

VenueAgroecology and Sustainable Food Systems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDiverse Educational Innovations Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersMitacs
KeywordsGrazingPsychologySociologyPedagogyBusinessEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasing interest in sustainable beneficial management practices (BMPs) such as those advocated by regenerative agriculture have led to a proliferation of programs encouraging adoption. Mentors including teachers, consultants, and peer farmers can significantly influence adoption decisions. While research in climate-smart agriculture has highlighted mentor support in a mentee’s learning pathway, little research has turned the learning lens to the mentors and examined the pathways through which they arrived as leaders and mentors in their fields and their learning process. This study examined the Farm Resilience Mentorship Program (FaRM) in Canada. In 2022, FaRM recruited 26 mentors across Canada and provided training in mentorship and advanced grazing systems. Through interviews, we explored 12 program mentors’ adoption process and the role support networks and mentors had in their learning pathways. Our findings highlight how diverse social connections support motivations to learn and adoption and how the adoption experience and support systems inform mentor approaches to teaching and knowledge exchange. These findings have implications for how programs can support the development of mentors and enhance engagement in training programs improving sustainable production and farm resilience.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgroecology and Sustainable Food SystemsSame topicDiverse Educational Innovations StudiesFrench-language works237,207