Bibliographic record
Abstract
The traditional role of the school principal as head teacher, school secretary, janitor and nurse became transformed during the last century in the United States, as growth of the size of city schools required principals to provide supervisory and instructional leadership. By the turn of the century, principals of large urban centres were granted much administrative control over their schools and were relieved of teaching, clerical, janitorial and medical duties so that they could devote their time to inspect classes and manage their staff. As this was the state of the profession in the United States, the purpose of this thesis is to investigate whether or not the same kind of change occurred in Canadian schools, and whether this American trend had any impact on the pace or pattern of change for Canadian school principals. Early school principalship in Vancouver, as it developed from 1886 to 1928, is selected as a case for inquiry. The study profiles the personal and professional background of Vancouver's first principals and describes the nature of their work during this time period. As the various available sources, such as the annual provincial superintendent's reports and school board meeting minutes show, while the profession did undergo similar type of reform, as principals evolved from head teachers to supervisors and managers, the process was hampered by local elements and concerns, as well as decisions made by city and provincial authorities. One can conclude from these findings that, for one Canadian city at least, new models and ideas in school administration from the United States were not quickly or easily transferred and adopted. For Vancouver, the decision to redefine the role of school principals happened only when local needs justified such a move.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".