Transforming curriculum leadership: vice principals in independent Christian elementary schools /
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The literature on the vice principalship characterizes the position as one filled with clerical record keeping and student discipline and paints a picture of role conflict and general discontent. Research suggests that vice principals desire to take on a more significant role, specifically a role in curriculum leadership. Using open-ended interviews, a focus group interview, document analysis, and my research journal, I have explored the work ofa group of vice principals who have taken on the role of curriculum leader in independent Christian elementary schools in Ontario. When asked to explain their understanding of curriculum, the participants referred to written programs of study. However, their leadership activities reveal a broader understanding of curriculum as something that is in fact dynamic in nature. This leadership is enabled and shaped by their middle position on staff that combines the authority of an administrator and the credibility of a teacher. Although this dual identity creates tension, it also provides opportunities for genuine curriculum leadership. As middle leaders, the participants in this study often pull together or connect elements of the curriculum (teachers, principals, and programs) that have become separated. Such connective leadership is characterized by transformational (Van Brummelen, 2002) tendencies. This research suggests that the further along the continuum one goes from the understanding of curriculum as planned (Eisner, 1994) to acknowledging a lived curriculum (Aoki, 1993), the more transformational 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 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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".