Bibliographic record
Abstract
Teacher leadership remains to be a term that is less understood in practice and is exercised occasionally and only in schools where teacher leadership is valued (Helterbran, 2010). This study adopts qualitative approach using concepts from York-Barr and Duke (2004) and Harris (2005) to examine the practice of teacher leadership from the perspective of teachers. The research questions are 1) how do teachers understand teacher leadership 2) what does a teacher leader do? 3) what barriers and support do/did teachers have/had in applying leadership skills 4) what impact does teacher leadership have? There were 10 teachers who participated in this study from Toronto and Greater Toronto area in the Ontario Province through semi-structured interviews. Findings revealed that the term teacher leadership remains to be “vague” in the minds of many teachers even with those who have taken workshops or courses on teacher leadership. There are many conditions that effect teacher leadership such as time, school policies, relationships, and school culture. Finally, teachers believed that their leadership skills impact themselves, students, other teachers, the school, and community but this effect takes time to show on students, the school, and community.
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 | 0.022 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".