İnstructional Leadership Behaviors of School Administrators on the İmplementation of Secondary School Curricula
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
The aim of this study is to determine instructional leadership behaviors of secondary school administrators based on the perceptions of administrators and teachers. The study was carried out with 309 teachers and 68 school administrators working in 25 secondary schools in Turkey. The study was carried out with the descriptive survey research. The “Instructional Leadership Scale” was used in the study. “Simple random sampling” method was used in the sample selection. In the analysis of tha data; frequency, arithmetic mean, t-test, one way variance analysis and Dunnett’s T3 test statistics have been used. According to the results of the study, in all dimensions teachers’ perceptions of instructional leadership behaviors are lower compared to administrators’ perceptions. There is a significant difference between the administrators’ perceptions of their own level of instructional leadership and the teachers’ perceptions of administrators’ instructional leadership. While the teachers’ perceptions of school administrators’ instructional leadership do not vary in terms of gender, it exhibits variance in terms of length of service.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.027 | 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