Enhancing authentic leadership−followership
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
Much has been written about leadership in schools, but little mention has been made of followership. The article provides an awareness and foundation for future discussions about school followership. In 1992, Robert Kelly wrote The Power of Followership, which explains and analyses the world of followers and their relationship to leaders. Kelly’s framework provides the groundwork for this article and the important authentic leader−follower relationships that drives the life of a school, with particular attention to the teacher. We move back and forth along this leadership and followership continuum during our lives. Research questions include: Why do people choose to follow? Are there different types of followers? How can the leadership−followership relationship be nurtured in a school? The development of relationships that contribute to leadership−followership will be examined through the application of practical in-school activities with students and staff. Recent teacher feedback from over 400 Canadian teachers suggests that an effective school has established a balanced authentic leadership−followership dynamic that provides opportunities for all members of the school community, regardless of role, to participate.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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