Vice Principalship and Moral Literacy: Developing a Moral Compass
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Competency in moral Literacy, like any other literacy develops through careful and continual practice (Herman, 2007). In this qualitative study we explore the vice principalship and the development of administrative moral literacy. Using a northern Ontario Canada case study, we recount how three secondary school vice principals further their own moral literacy through the execution of their professional role—specifically, how such practices as professional decision making, self-reflection and the use of personal self messaging can ameliorate moral literacy competency. We used both interviews and job-shadowing to investigate how participants navigated the challenges of the vice principalship, and how participants defined and measured success. We analysed stories and metaphors (Clandinin and Connelly, 2000; Seidman, 2006) to identify specific skills and strategies in the formation of moral literacy, such as a sense of moral purpose, self-knowledge and self-regulation, flexibility, vision and a high tolerance for ambiguity.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it