Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research project investigates the effectiveness of principal preparation programs for early-career principals using the question How useful are principal preparation programs to novice principals? This paper maps the formal and informal principal preparation opportunities available in Alberta, Canada. The analysis was part of the International Study of Principal Preparation designed to explore leadership development in 13 countries. The social, political, and economic context of Alberta is outlined to provide a backdrop for the education system in which principals’ practice. The study employed a mixed-methods design comprised of three stages: mapping of principal preparation programming using a range of information sources, case studies of school principals in the first three years of their appointments, and a questionnaire administered to a sample of early-career principals in each country represented by the ISPP research team. This article reports the first stage mapping of principal preparation programming in Alberta, Canada. Principal preparation in Alberta is described in terms of its intended audience, content, structure, deliverers, delivery modes, credentials, and pedagogy. Leadership development opportunities that are described include non-credit in-service, graduate certificates and graduate diplomas, master’s degrees, and doctoral degrees. Informal programs may be powerful but variable in terms of rigor. The laddering from graduate certificate-graduate diploma-master’s degree may provide an articulation pathway that more traditional programs preclude. Formal programs may link local, national, and international evidence more strongly than their informal counterparts. The mapping of principal preparation in Alberta, Canada, suggests that leadership development has evolved over the history of the province and nation and, therefore, so must leadership development programming. The mapping also suggests that principal preparation should attend more to the needs of all citizens in Alberta, not just the majority. There is a need for ongoing cross-cultural examinations of leadership development and its impact on principals’ identities and professional practices. The authors caution against “credential creep” in that more certificates, diplomas, and degrees do not necessarily mean better leadership without adequate attention to the social, political, and economic environments in which leaders practice. Also, the potential benefits of inter-institutional collaboration among organizations and across cultures should be explored in future studies. Finally, the authors do not suggest a one-size-fits-all model for leadership development but, rather, they offer a set of insights intended to inform other professional developers.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".