Knowledge influencers: leaders influencing knowledge creation and mobilization
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
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the influence of leaders on knowledge creation and mobilization. Design/methodology/approach – This mixed methods study included three high-performing districts based on provincial assessment results and socio-economic factors. Interviews and questionnaires were used to gather data from 53 participants including: 11 principals, 11 teacher leaders, 26 teachers, and five system leaders. Findings – The findings of the study emphasized the importance of leaders supporting knowledge creation and mobilization processes through practices such as engaging school-based knowledge influencers and fostering cultures of trust and risk taking. The author defined knowledge influencers as leaders, formal or informal, who have access to knowledge creating groups at the local and system level. These leaders influenced knowledge mobilization at different levels of the district. Research limitations/implications – A research limitation of this study was present based on the sole use of high-performing districts and schools. Participation was determined via comparisons of provincial assessment results (Ontario, Canada) and socio-economic status (SES) factors. Although causal effects are cautioned, districts and schools from various SES communities (high, medium, low) were chosen to support broad generalizations and associations. Practical implications – This study provided pragmatic considerations and recommendations for system and school leaders, those charged with increasing student achievement (e.g. use of knowledge influencers and an expanded array of data use while creating knowledge). Originality/value – A knowledge creation model was developed by the author based on a synthesis of the findings. The model and study will be of interest to those wishing to further implement or study the creation and mobilization of knowledge within organizations.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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