Investigating teacher leadership as a means of building school capacity
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The purpose of this research was to investigate teacher leadership as a means of building the capacity of one school to respond to the diverse learning needs of all students. This school was selected because the quantitative data collected in a larger study on impact of Secondary School Reform in Ontario schools, indicated that this school had established collaborative networks and strong relationships. It appeared that an environment had been created in this school where the expectations for teachers to work as school-wide leaders had become the norm. A shared leadership model had been established and teachers worked within that model through Management Learning Teams (MLT) to become school-wide leaders. Using a qualitative approach that included a combination of observation of teachers in action in their MLTs as well as follow-up interviews, the dynamics of how teachers work as leaders was examined. Data were gathered about the nature of the leadership activities that teachers were involved with outside the classroom, how teacher leaders influenced one another, how communities of learning were facilitated and how teachers leaders overcame the obstacles they encountered. The strongest theme that emerged is that principal and teacher leadership are inseparable as means of enhancing school capacity. Both the principal and the teachers must adopt new roles as leaders within the school and these new roles must be part of a shared leadership model that outlines the communication and flow of information to all the members of the school. Central to this model was the connection between administration as the strategic leaders of the school and the teachers as the leaders in the classroom. Creating structures that were built into the daily routines of the school empowered teachers to become involved and impact the decisions that were being made about a variety of different teaching and learning issues. However, in spite of the many opportunities for collaboration it became evident that professional autonomy still seems to play a powerful role in limiting the degree to which teacher leaders could influence a change of instructional practice that may lead to improved student learning.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,015 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».