MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2400824302 · doi:10.33524/cjar.v17i1.242

PRINCIPAL PRESERVICE EDUCATION FOR LEADERSHIP IN INCLUSIVE SCHOOLS

2016· article· en· W2400824302 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Wanda Lyons

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Action Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrincipal (computer security)PedagogyEducational leadershipAction researchPsychologyInstructional leadershipMedical educationInclusion (mineral)Mathematics educationPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Principal leadership has been identified as the key to successful implementation of inclusive education for students with disabilities. Prospective principals require knowledge, skills, and dispositions to equip them to work with key stakeholders to initiate and sustain inclusive practices within their schools. The purpose of this action research study was to (a) examine principals’ perspectives on their preservice education needs to prepare them for a leadership role in an inclusive school; (b) to develop and implement an experimental graduate-level course in Educational Administration focusing on leadership in inclusive education; and (c) collect data on student and instructor experiences and perspectives throughout the course. This paper reports on the course development and implementation within two settings in subsequent semesters. Findings indicate agreement on the need for preservice education to prepare principals for leadership within inclusive schools and recommendations for course content and delivery are discussed.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.377
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.116 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Action ResearchSame topicCollaborative Teaching and InclusionFrench-language works237,207