Review of Scott Eacott’s book Beyond Leadership: A Relational Approach to Organizational Theory in Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scott Eacottand Richard Niescheare in the process of editing a book series under the banner of Educational Leadership Theory. The intent of the series is “to deliver an innovative and provocative dialogue whose coherence comes not from the adoption of a single paradigmatic lens but rather in an engagement with the theoretical and methodological preliminaries of scholarship” (Eacott, 2018, p. v). In the book, Beyond Leadership: A Relational Approach to Organizational Theory in Education, Eacott engages in an act of scholarship designed to stimulate a style of academic debate as noted by the preface to Educational Leadership Theory series. Eacott’s stated purpose of the book is to present a “relatively new approach to scholarship in educational administration [one that] offers a means of overcoming limitations in the explanatory value of contemporary terms and the need for theoretical resources to engage with organizing activity” (p. 5). True to his stated purpose, Eacott delivers a seventeen-chapter book where he presents his argument (chapters one to eight), provides other academics with a venue for dialogue and debate (chapters nine to fifteen), and concludes with a section that he calls ”Moving Forward” where he offers a response through his commentary and conclusion (chapters sixteen and seventeen).
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".