The Problem of the Penumbra: Elementary School Principals' Exercise of Discretion in Student Disciplinary Issues
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Maintaining order and discipline is one of the most challenging aspects of the school-based administrator’s role. School officials make disciplinary decisions within a context that is established, in part, by case law, legislation and regulations, school board policies and social, organizational and individual values. The exercise of administrative discretion is vital to the decision-making process. It offers school leaders creativity and flexibility. The interpretation and implementation of school discipline policies by in-school administrators can provide insight into their discretionary decision-making. The purpose of this study was to determine how principals in an urban school division in Western Canada negotiated within the legal parameters of discretion as it is delegated to them in legislation and school board policy in order to be faithful to their own values system in matters of student discipline. The study assumed Christopher Hodgkinson’s hierarchy of values as a theoretical framework for examining the administrators’ decision-making, and used H.L.A. Hart’s concept of law as a system of rules as an additional lens through which to view the exercise of administrative discretion. Employing an interpretive qualitative research methodology, the researcher conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with ten elementary school principals. Findings of the research reflect that the way principals perceived the exercise of discretion enabled them to maintain school safety, to be, in their judgment, fair and just in decision-making in disciplinary situations, to balance competing rights in the school setting and to make decisions in what they understood to be the best interests of their students. The principals’ exercise of discretion, however, appeared to be subject to various values and influences which could lead to injustice and arbitrariness in decision-making. In the end, I concluded discretionary power should be structured, limited and subject to review in order to provide accountability to stakeholders. Implications of the study suggest principals should develop greater awareness of their own values system and be reflective about their judgments and decision-making. Schools should have clearly-defined codes of conduct, and school divisions should outline expectations for discipline policy implementation and adherence by principals.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,013 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».