MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2563351758 · doi:10.1108/jpcc-09-2016-0022

The school as a learning organisation: a review revisiting and extending a timely concept

2016· review· en· W2563351758 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Professional Capital and Community · 2016
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineDecision Sciences
ThématiqueEducational Assessment and Improvement
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésWork (physics)Point (geometry)SociologyEngineering ethicsPublic relationsComputer sciencePolitical scienceEngineering

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Purpose Schools today have to prepare students for life and work in a fast-changing world, for jobs and for using technologies some of which have not yet been created. But the schools and school systems are not keeping up and all too often, teachers are not developing the practices and skills required to meet today’s learners’ diverse needs. Changes indicate a greater imperative but also some cautions. This review is part of the attempt to work towards a common understanding of schools as learning organisations (SLOs) today which is both solidly founded in the literature and recognisable currently by researchers, practitioners and policy makers in many countries. But this is not just a theoretical exercise. If it is to be truly relevant and have the necessary impact, the concept also needs to support those who are interested in transforming or further developing their school(s) into learning organisations (LO) at this point in time. In this paper, the authors first summarise different perspectives on the concept of the LO as used more generally across disciplines. Next, the authors describe the methodology for exploring the SLO and discuss definitional issues, before presenting a summary of the integrated model with accompanying rationale, Finally the authors discuss plans to bring the model to life, with associated issues for researchers, educators and policy makers. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach The search for this literature in the English language was carried out through: focussed searches of nine electronic databases – ERIC, SAGE, Google Scholar, Taylor & Francis, Emerald, JSTOR, SpringerLink, Google, Science Direct – using the search terms “SLO” and “learning school”; and contacts with leading experts in this area of work which led to identification of additional literature. The first approach led to selection of 25 most frequently found publications on the SLO and/or learning school. Through the second approach, the authors used an additional seven publications to further enrich the analysis. The interdisciplinary review was extended to include investigation of related organisational change, learning, school improvement and effectiveness literatures. Findings The starting hypothesis is that the seven action-oriented dimensions of the model together add up to a sustainable LO; that is, successfully realising all seven dimensions is greater than the sum of the parts. But, it is not clear how the individual dimensions relate to each other, and whether some are more important than others. Elements within dimensions are also likely to vary across country contexts. Over the next few years the authors will explore and amend the model, together with practitioners, policy makers and researchers from around the globe. Practical implications Despite differences in interpretation, common features emerge. First, there is general agreement that the SLO is a necessity for dealing with the rapidly changing external environment by any school organisation, regardless of context. This is exemplified by application of the concept in many countries including, for example, Australia, Canada, England and Wales, Iran, Israel, Korea, Malaysia, South-Africa and the USA. Second, the SLO is defined as “organic” and closely connected to its external environment. Third, the SLO literature strongly emphasises the importance of individual, group and organisational learning with inquiry, problem solving and experimentation as key drivers of change and innovation. Last, the literature highlights the importance of beliefs, values and norms of employees for continuous and collaborative learning, and processes, strategies and structures to create the conditions for such learning, experimentation and innovation to flourish. The review led to the design of a new action-oriented model. In its current form, the model is intended to offer a stimulus and provide practical guidance on how schools might support and use learning at all levels to improve and transform themselves into a LO and ultimately enhance outcomes. The language is deliberately action-oriented, and elements highlight both what a school aspires to and the processes it goes through in its journey of developing itself as a LO. Originality/value While the concept of a school LO is not new, at a time of constant and complex change, this multi-disciplinary international literature review has given it a new lease of life: drawing on previous studies, but connecting these to a wider relevant knowledge base and the current context. It offers a way forward while arguing that deeper understanding is needed on how schools can develop as LOs. It is now informing the OECD’s work on SLOs with policy makers and practitioners in different countries and the findings are being used to help assess impact at a range of levels.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,013
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Études des sciences et des technologies, Intégrité de la recherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Autre devis · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,993
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0130,008
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,137
Tête enseignante GPT0,482
Écart entre enseignants0,346 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle