Bibliographic record
Abstract
Educationaladministrationisadisciplinethatinvitesamultiplicityofperspectives. This study explores the careers of Inuit women who have been educational leaders in Nunavut schools for a number of years. It examines what it is like for them to be school administrators in the Canadian Arctic. The questions investigated include: How do Inuit women principals understand their role? What forces have shaped the way Inuit women see themselves as leaders in educational settings? Are the perceptions of the participants consistent with the paradigm of administration in Nunavut schools expressed by the Nunavut Department of Education and the Educational Leadership Program that is required for principal certification? What changes are needed to make the principal’s role more reflective of Inuit beliefs and ways of leading? What supports are needed to encourage more Inuit women to become school administrators? The dissertation employs a narrative inquiry methodology to explore the training programs, supports, satisfactions and challenges of Nunavut women principals. The results challenge the partiality of perspectives on school leadership in the dominant discourse and point to the need for greater cultural sensitivity when helping to establish school systems in unique cultural contexts. They show that community members need to become actively involved in schools on a regular basis to support a vision of education based on Inuit values. Inuit administrators need the time and opportunity to work collaboratively with elders, their co-principals, mentors and each other, in order to support and guide their staff, students and community with a more relevant model of school leadership.
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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.078 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".