MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7024714235

Social Capital and Mentoring: Rethinking Mentoring with a Decolonized Perspective

2024· article· en· W7024714235 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSOURCE Sheridan's Institutional Repository (Sheridan College) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Physics and Python Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101HyporeflexiaTubulopathyDemotionArticular cartilage damage
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mentoring programs that provide newcomers with information about Canadian work norms and culture have the potential to positively impact the integration of skilled immigrants into the Canadian lab our market. Past research on immigrant integration has highlighted the benefits immigrants receive from mentorship programs, such as support, empathy, encouragement, counseling and friendship, collegiality, and career satisfaction. Less is known about the benefits that mentors receive from these programs. This highlights a crucial gap in understanding the reciprocal benefits of mentorship and its impacts on mentors. This paper shares findings from a research study on “Facilitators and Barriers to Mentorship Programs for Newcomers to Canada” to highlight the benefits mentors gain in the form of social capital and, in doing so, to emphasize the need to decolonize existing mentorship programs and incorporate Indigenous values in mentorship practices. A decolonizing agenda is crucial to address historical and ongoing systemic inequities and to promote inclusive and equitable mentorship practices.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0210.072
Scholarly communication0.0210.018
Open science0.0040.026
Research integrity0.0040.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSOURCE Sheridan's Institutional Repository (Sheridan College)Same topicComputational Physics and Python ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207