MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052257172 · doi:10.12735/ier.v2i1p44

Principals and Teachers’ perceptions of School-Based Management

2014· article· en· W2052257172 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hon Keung Yau

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionMathematics educationPsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study aims to examine the perceptions of a sample of Hong Kong principals and teachers of the extent to which school-based management (SBM) has been effectively implemented in primary schools. More specifically, the purpose of this study is to investigate the following research questions, as perceived by principals and teachers: (1) Which features of SBM are being implemented in Hong Kong primary schools; (2) To what exten are they being implemented? (3) What is the difference between the perceptions of teachers and principals towards SBM? The features of school-based management implemented in Hong Kong primary schools include (1) leadership competence and work relationships, (2) staff coordination and effectiveness, (3) financial planning and control, and (4) resources and accommodation. A quantitative, survey questionnaire was adopted in this study. A total of 322 respondents (83 principals and 239 teachers) out of 83 primary schools responded to the questionnaire. The means, standard deviation and t-test were used to analyze the results. The finding shows that all four features of school-based management are perceived as being implemented in Hong Kong primary schools, but the degree of their implementation is not the same. The most adopted elements of school-based management are ‘financial planning and control ’ and ‘leadership

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.438
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.284
GPT teacher head0.559
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education ResearchSame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207