MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2748186553

Influence of Pedagogical Supervisors’ Practices and Perceptions on the Use of Results-Based Management

2017· article· en· W2748186553 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Daniel April, Yamina Bouchamma

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObligationPedagogyPerceptionSociologyPolitical sciencePsychologyHumanitiesPublic relationsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

English: In the province of Quebec, Canada, school principals are obligated by law to ensure pedagogical supervision. This law, the Public Education Act, also advocates a contractual Results-Based Management approach (RBM). We examined how the practices and perceptions of these supervisors influence the implementation of this approach. The legal ramifications for these school leaders were also explored, as were the concept of pedagogical supervision and the underlying principles of the goal-setting theory and task performance (Locke & Latham, 1990: 2002: 2006) which constituted the conceptual framework of our research. This study was part of a collaborative research project conducted with 21 school principals and vice-principals of the Decouvreurs School Board in Quebec City. Results show that RBM supports the pedagogical perspective of the supervisors and rallies the school-team to adopt the proposed objectives. However, the goals of one member may not be the same as those of the organization and the setting of goals may limit exploration and achievement if members underestimate the means. Francais : Au Quebec, la supervision pedagogique est une obligation de la direction d’etablissement d’enseignement inscrite dans la Loi sur l’instruction publique (LIP). Parallelement, cette meme loi preconise une approche contractuelle de gouvernance nommee Gestion axee sur les resultats (GAR). L’objectif de cet article est d’etudier les perceptions et les pratiques de membres de la direction d’etablissement en supervision pedagogique qui (a) facilitent et (b) entravent l’application de la GAR. Pour ce faire, nous poserons les jalons du cadre legal dans lequel evolue la direction d’etablissement d’enseignement, definirons le concept de supervision pedagogique et cernerons les principes directeurs de la theorie de la fixation des objectifs (Locke et Latham, 1990 ; 2002 ; 2006) qui constitue notre cadre conceptuel. Cet article s’inscrit dans le cadre d’une recherche collaborative menee avec 21 membres de la direction de la Commission scolaire des Decouvreurs. Les resultats montrent que la GAR, malgre d’importantes limites, semble soutenir le discours pedagogique des directions et amener l’equipe-ecole a adherer aux visees et valeurs vehiculees. Cependant, les objectifs d’un membre peuvent ne pas converger avec eux de l’organisation. De plus, la fixation d’objectifs peut limiter l’exploration si les acteurs minimisent les moyens d’atteinte.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.574
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.524
GPT teacher head0.568
Teacher spread0.044 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and PolicySame topicEvaluation and Performance AssessmentFrench-language works237,207