MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039523856 · doi:10.1080/15700760490503689

Prior Student Achievement, Collaborative School Processes, and Collective Teacher Efficacy

2004· article· en· W2039523856 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLeadership and Policy in Schools · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParental Involvement in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollective efficacyPsychologyMathematics educationCohesion (chemistry)PerceptionSelf-efficacyTeacher leadershipAcademic achievementCollective responsibilityControl (management)Principal (computer security)Student achievementPedagogyEducational leadershipSocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Collective teacher efficacy refers to teacher perceptions that they constitute an effective instructional team, capable of bringing about learning in students. Previous research demonstrates that a school staff with a strong sense of collective efficacy is likely to generate high student achievement. This study of 2,170 teachers in 141 elementary schools used structural equation modeling to examine the antecedents of collective teacher efficacy. The study found that prior student achievement in grade 6 mathematics predicted collective teacher efficacy, as expected by social cognition theory. The study also found that school processes that promoted teacher ownership of school directions (shared school goals, school-wide decision making, fit of plans with school needs, and empowering principal leadership) exerted an even stronger influence on collective teacher efficacy than prior student achievement. School cohesion and support contributed to collective teacher efficacy, but only in domains in which the school had control over its directions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it