MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074690204 · doi:10.1080/1360080x.2013.748479

Distributed leadership: rhetoric or reality?

2013· article· en· W2074690204 on OpenAlexaff
Joe Corrigan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Higher Education Policy and Management · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRhetoricDistributed leadershipShared leadershipPower (physics)AccountabilityPublic relationsLeadership styleLeadershipLeadership studiesSociologyTransactional leadershipPower structureServant leadershipEducational leadershipPolitical sciencePedagogyPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides insight into distributed leadership by contrasting the oppositional messages found in the literature, and by examining differences in the rhetoric and reality associated with its application. Specifically, the treatment of power and accountability within the distributed leadership theoretical framework is difficult to reconcile. Given the problems associated with the theory and practice of distributed leadership, this paper asks why it is enjoying resurgence at this time? This paper will be of interest to researchers, educators and administrators who are interested in the study and practice of educational 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.231 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations39
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Higher Education Policy and ManagementSame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207