A Comparison of the Use of Strategic Thinking Skills of Aspiring School Leaders in Hong Kong, Malaysia, Shanghai, and the United States: An Exploratory Study
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
Cognition is the way we use mental skills to acquire knowledge, manipulate ideas, and process new information and beliefs. The Strategic Thinking Questionnaire (STQ), which measures three such skills – systems thinking – reframing – reflection, was used to collect data from students preparing for school leadership roles at four universities in the United States (USA), Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Shanghai. It was thought that the use of these skills might vary from country to country because of western and eastern cultural norms. Based on self-reported data from 328 educators preparing for school leadership roles we concluded that the use of strategic thinking skills were found in all locations but the variance in their use is more a function of age of respondents, and gender rather than location. These findings have implications for training, professional development, and selection of aspiring leaders.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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