MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mentoring for Wellbeing Through Inquiry

2025· book-chapter· en· W4416617303 on OpenAlexaff
Keith Walker, Kabini Sanga

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMentoring and Academic Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMentorshipTask (project management)Interpersonal communicationInterpersonal relationshipPromotion (chess)Socratic questioning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter illustrates by how inquiring conversations between a mentor and a mentee can result in profound promotion of mentee wellbeing. Beginning with the authors’ reflections on their own experiences with inquiring mentors, they, then, introduce Socratic and maieutic approaches to mentoring. A heuristic for thinking about wholistic mentorship inquiry is introduced with a four-fold way of giving attention to mentee identity, discernment, exploration and task engagement. Finally, the chapter offers 20 types of inquiry questions that mentors might use to create opportunities for mentees to give attention to the various dimensions of their personal, interpersonal and workplace practices and promote wellbeing.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMentoring and Academic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207