The board-president relationship in three British Columbia community colleges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The issue of governance in institutions of higher education has attracted considerable attention in the North American literature. While much has been published concerning the respective roles of the president and the governing board in managing the affairs of colleges and universities, limited attention has been given to the relationship which exists between the two parties. Furthermore, while the importance of the relationship is acknowledged, there has been no systematic research to determine reasons for such a claim. This study examines the board-president relationship in three community colleges in the province of British Columbia and ascertains reasons for its importance. The research framework on which the study is based consists of three major components, the determinants of the board-president relationship, its effects, and the characteristics of the relationship itself. The literature on boards and presidents implies that any relationships which do exist fall into three distinct dimensions, formal, operational, and personal. The three dimensions of the relationship are used in this study as a focal point and conceptual centre around which research questions are designed. The method involves a qualitative-interpretive design which generates both documentary, factual data and perceptual data from two major sources. The sources are institutional and legal documents and in-depth interviews with the presidents and board members from the three institutions. The study largely reveals an understanding of the relationship from the perspective of the participants. The conclusions which emerge from this investigation indicate that the board-president relationship at each college displays characteristics which identify the relationship with the articulated goals, philosophy, and values of each institution and reflects its development. Moreover, as perceived by the participants, the relationship exerts important influence upon the image of the college with both its internal and external community, while reinforcing the values and philosophy of the institution. The research provides a beginning for the development of theory in the area of leadership and management in institutions of post-secondary education. It also offers insights for practitioners concerned with the improvement of their effectiveness in governance, specifically in the colleges in British Columbia. The study has moved beyond current scholarship on the board-president relationship; it has also prepared the groundwork for further research by posing several hypothetical questions which arise from this investigation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".