Exploring a Literacy Partnership to Inform Educational Leadership: The Story of Calgary Reads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. This study focuses on a significant challenge in an educational leader’s role; working to ensure success for all students. Consistent, strong leadership at both school and district levels can positively impact outcomes for students. While school leadership can create the conditions that encourage high-quality teaching and improved outcomes for students, education system leadership can create the conditions that allow school leaders to be successful. It is widely recognized that a child’s journey to becoming literate is closely linked to future learning. In such complex and demanding work, educational leaders often find themselves grappling for the best possible approaches and practices to improving literacy outcomes. In some instances, educational leaders seek opportunities to collaborate with community support. The purpose of this narrative inquiry was to investigate one such community program in an attempt to inform the literacy practices of school-based and system-based educational leaders. The community program examined in this study was Calgary Reads, a literacy-focused agency which collaborates with schools and school districts around literacy, including providing early literacy interventions in elementary school settings. Interviews with the organization’s executive director, one district leader, four school-based leaders, twelve classroom teachers and eight children, all who are supported by Calgary Reads, provided the study’s data. In total, 26 participant stories were gathered, presented, and thematically analyzed. The narrative analysis revealed the strongly expressed need for ongoing, meaningful professional learning opportunities in early literacy for leaders and teachers. From this overarching narrative theme, recommendations regarding system and school supports, leader and teacher professional learning needs and decision-making approaches regarding early literacy in schools and school systems are provided. Keywords: educational leadership, literacy, professional development, 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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.039 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".