MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294437764 · doi:10.1177/1098300715599960

In Search of How Principals Change

2015· article· en· W2294437764 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Positive Behavior Interventions · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersInstitute of Education SciencesU.S. Department of Education
KeywordsPsychologyPrincipal (computer security)Psychological interventionPositive behavior supportCritical variableQualitative researchBehavior changeApplied psychologySocial psychologyIntervention (counseling)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research has shown principal support to be a critical variable for implementing and sustaining evidence-based practices. However, there remains little understanding of the factors that may influence a principal’s personal decision to support a practice. The purpose of the current study was to examine events that influenced principals’ support for a widely used approach to behavior in schools, school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS). In-depth interviews were conducted with 10 school administrators who self-reported that they were initially opposed to or not supportive of PBIS but became stronger supporters over time. Qualitative analysis using the Enhanced Critical Incident Technique revealed eight helping and three hindering categories of experiences in change in support, as well as two categories of early experiences that they reported might have built their support from the beginning. Implications for enhancing administrator support are provided.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.716

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.658
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.152 · 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