Principal Leadership and Its Link to the Development of School Teacher Culture and Teaching Effectiveness: A case Study of an Award-Winning Teaching Team at an Elementary School
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to (1) describe principal leadership and the context of the overall school teacher culture that cultivated an award-wining team at an elementary school; (2) analyze the award-winning team’s learning behaviors, shared goals, values, beliefs, mutual interactions or dialogues, and experience sharing among members; and (3) unveil the key factors that shape excellent teaching team culture and its functions. Major findings are: 1. The award-winning teacher group at the school was able to facilitate the development of professional co-operation and teaching innovation within the school, and transform the school into a learning community. 2. The campus ethics of affiliation, collegiality, and experience-heritage was enforced at the award-wining elementary school. 3. The school leaders, especially the principal, had a critical impact on the development of school teacher culture via their determination and encouragement. 4. Both the school principal and the school’s senior teachers played an exemplary and leading role in shaping a high-quality school culture for professional development. The study concludes that the principal and the senior teachers played an exemplary and leading role in shaping a positive school culture, and that a positive school culture can enhance school effectiveness and productive power.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".