MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094280790 · doi:10.4236/ce.2014.58069

School Management Competencies: Perceptions and Self-Efficacy Beliefs of School Principals

2014· article· en· W2094280790 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yamina Bouchamma, Marc Basque, Caroline Marcotte

Bibliographic record

VenueCreative Education · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MonctonUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNominationChristian ministryPerceptionPsychologySchool administrationMedical educationProfessional developmentAdministration (probate law)PedagogyPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In several contexts, reform in the training and nomination of future school principals was based on competency profiles. In Québec, it was not until 2008 that its Ministry of Education established a profile of competencies specifically for school principals. This study proposed a questionnaire on the perceptions and self-efficacy beliefs of school principals with regard to these competencies and their associated factors. Respondents gave greater weight to the management of education services, followed by human resources, educational environment, and finally, administration. A significant difference was observed between administrative management and the teaching level and school size. The principals whose professional development activities consisted of conventions and seminars also felt a greater sense of personal efficacy on this factor compared to the principals whose professional development was done through mentoring.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations22
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCreative EducationSame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207