Transforming curriculum leadership: vice principals in independent Christian elementary schools /
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The literature on the vice principalship characterizes the position as one \nfilled with clerical record keeping and student discipline and paints a picture of role \nconflict and general discontent. Research suggests that vice principals desire to \ntake on a more significant role, specifically a role in curriculum leadership. Using \nopen-ended interviews, a focus group interview, document analysis, and my \nresearch journal, I have explored the work ofa group of vice principals who have \ntaken on the role of curriculum leader in independent Christian elementary schools \nin Ontario. \nWhen asked to explain their understanding of curriculum, the participants \nreferred to written programs of study. However, their leadership activities reveal a \nbroader understanding of curriculum as something that is in fact dynamic in nature. \nThis leadership is enabled and shaped by their middle position on staff that \ncombines the authority of an administrator and the credibility of a teacher. \nAlthough this dual identity creates tension, it also provides opportunities for \ngenuine curriculum leadership. \nAs middle leaders, the participants in this study often pull together or \nconnect elements of the curriculum (teachers, principals, and programs) that have \nbecome separated. Such connective leadership is characterized by transformational \n(Van Brummelen, 2002) tendencies. This research suggests that the further along \nthe continuum one goes from the understanding of curriculum as planned (Eisner, \n1994) to acknowledging a lived curriculum (Aoki, 1993), the more \ntransformational one's leadership style becomes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".