MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902097142 · doi:10.11575/prism/32844

Middle School Principals’ Understandings and Practices of Instructional Leadership

2018· dissertation· en· W2902097142 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael William Nelson

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEducational leadershipInstructional leadershipPedagogyTeacher leadershipMathematics educationPsychologyPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this case study was to gain insight into how experienced middle school principals understand the concept of instructional leadership and, further, perceive their enactments of instructional leadership to build the instructional capacity of the teachers in their schools. Research into instructional leadership indicates that school principals contribute indirectly to school effectiveness and student achievement through actions (practices) that influence the type and quality of instruction in schools and classrooms; however, there is limited research on this topic that is specific to leadership in middle schools. The study used qualitative case study methodology involving semi-structured interviews with five experienced middle school principals, all from a large, urban public school district in Alberta. The findings of this inquiry revealed six key themes. Middle school principals in this study: (a) have a strong theoretical understanding of leadership for learning, (b) define their practices of instructional leadership through shared leadership, PLC structures, and a focus on relationships, (c) perceive their practices of instructional leadership to include developing leadership capacity of others, (d) share beliefs and understandings, and enact practices of instructional leadership that are strongly influenced by a specific body of leadership literature that is promoted through district-led professional learning initiatives, (e) believe there are contextual differences that impact not just their leadership generally, but their instructional leadership, and (f) have a sophisticated theoretical understanding of instructional leadership and leadership for learning; however, they struggle to provide evidence of how their practices impact teachers’ instructional capacity and student learning. The findings of my study contribute to the growing body of knowledge related to instructional leadership, especially as it focuses on middle schools.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)Same topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207