Practices of and Roadblocks to Teacher Leadership in the United Arab Emirates’ Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates teachers’ perceptions of their leadership practices in United Arab Emirates schools and the contextual and personal factors which support or deter them from becoming teacher leaders. The study used a mixed research design. First, a self-administered questionnaire was completed by 937 teachers in one big city in the UAE. Then, individual interviews with ten teachers were conducted. The study found that while certain leadership roles, as measured by the questionnaire items, are often practiced by teachers, other activities such as leading action research or participating in professional groups, are practiced infrequently. Interview data revealed that teachers perceive that school administrators usually encourage them to take on leading roles, but that administrators also rely heavily on “in-group” teachers to take on leadership activities. Further, school contextual factors such as lack of time, language barriers, and style of leadership; or personal factors such as teachers’ assumptions about and willingness to take on additional leadership duties are roadblocks to a full realization of the potential for teacher leadership and its associated benefits in UAE schools. Recommendations on how to foster teacher leadership on a wider scale in the UAE schools are presented.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".