how can one show a mentorship or an open source advanced the sector
@tunde1234 Trust you are okay.
Sometimes feedback like this comes when the activity or engagement wasn’t sustained, maybe it happened once or didn’t show lasting impact. Recognition and impact are the key evidence elements for OC2 amongst other things like the credibility of the programme, organisation or platform. Advancing the sector is simply impact, and can be seen from two points in my opinion.
- Relevance and value
Was the mentorship or open-source work meaningful enough to actually help people in the sector? Or was it something anyone could easily find online? In this case, they acknowledged you did the work, but felt it didn’t clearly advance the field, that’s what they meant by
while genuine, it was not shown to have advanced the practices…
- Reach and influence
How many people were impacted? Showing metrics like reach, downloads, attendees of at least 100 helps prove that your contribution added real value to real humans and expanded the sector’s knowledge base and contribute to human capacity
So, on your question
how one can show that mentorship or open-source work advanced the sector
By making contributions(mentorship or open-source ) that are relevant, sustained, impactful, and clearly focused on advancing the field itself.
All the best.
(post deleted by author)
I did show impact it was 6 months had third party validation from the reputable mentorship sector post from them with my name attached, I used two different platform attached a referenced letter from one, yes I did focus on career outcomes.What should be the focus on advancement of sector? for the open source GitHub had 100 stars also and 5 contributors also accepted into curated widely used repository but they redirected it to mandatory criteria.
I get where you’re coming from, and I know how tricky these things can feel. But the truth is, a 6 month window on its own doesn’t automatically show impact. It also doesn’t prove sustained contribution if the actual activity during those months wasn’t clearly evidenced. Someone could contribute once or twice in six months and still end up with just few views or a small number of stars.
Third party validation is helpful for showing recognition or relevance, but it doesn’t prove sector impact. A reference letter is still internal validation, and on its own it won’t carry enough weight. Even with the 100 stars and 5 contributors you mentioned, based on recent feedback, that level of contribution usually isn’t considered strong enough.
On your question about advancement of the sector
This really depends on your discipline, your skill set, and application story. Focusing on general career outcomes is very different from mentoring people into becoming software engineers, or contributing in a way that clearly moves your field forward. The emphasis should be on how your actions helped your field, the wider tech ecosystem grow, not just individual career progress.
1 Like