LEADERSHIP EXCELLENCE AND ADVANCEMENT OF DIRECTORS (LEAD) PROGRAM: FIRST INSIGHTS FROM A NEW MENTORSHIP MODEL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Mentorship is critical to advancing leadership skills and building confidence in academia. However, there is a paucity of programs focused on supporting new center directors in the field of aging. Working with the Gerontological Society of America, we created the Leadership Excellence and Advancement of Directors (LEAD) Program as a mentorship model to provide peer support, networking opportunities, professional growth, and skill development for new center directors. This presentation aims to: 1) identify critical planning steps and strategies to develop high quality mentorship programs to support new center directors in the field of aging; and 2) recognize the LEAD Program as an emerging prototype to elevate leadership skills, build confidence, and advance research excellence to support new directors of gerontological research centers. The Lead Program is a groundbreaking GSA model that is geared towards new directors by providing peer support, leadership development, mentorship, and a dynamic network of fellow directors. The need for the LEAD Program was identified during a recent GSA Center Directors meeting where several directors shared that they were retiring and new directors were looking for mentorship support. The development of the LEAD Program was cultivated by: i) identifying priority topic areas and needs; ii) establishing meeting forma and frequency; iii) addressing potential program barriers and obstacles; and iv) exploring opportunities for peer support and collaboration to advance new directors in the field of aging. The next steps are to implement and evaluate the LEAD Program to strengthen the mentorship model for future cohorts of center directors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".