MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2983784600 · doi:10.11575/prism/37122

Chinese-Canadian Bilingual Program: Perceptions of School Culture and Leadership

2019· dissertation· en· W2983784600 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christine Esther Cheung

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEducational leadershipPolitical sciencePedagogyPerceptionSociologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The culture of every school is unique and exclusive to just their setting. A school’s culture evolves over time and it is the responsibility of the school’s leaders to understand it, cultivate it, change it if necessary, work within it, and negotiate it. The culture of a Chinese-Canadian bilingual program can be more distinctive and therefore complex to negotiate by school leaders as stakeholders have culturally and linguistically based expectations of the program that are linked to their own ancestral and/or ethnic culture. It therefore becomes important for leaders of Chinese bilingual programs to understand these expectations and unique aspects of their school culture in order to succeed. The purpose of this study was to identify the components and influences of the school culture of a Chinese-Canadian bilingual program and how the leaders of this program negotiated these components and influences. This inquiry was done through a qualitative research approach that employed a bounded case study methodology. Data was gathered through an anonymous online questionnaire that was given to the parents and teachers of this Chinese bilingual program, as well as through the review of school documents that were available to the public, and from drawing on personal experiences. The findings of this inquiry determined that the leaders of the Chinese Bilingual program must address the funds of knowledge of the parents, teachers, and of themselves. They do so by drawing on the properties of funds of knowledge, culturally responsive leadership, and linguistically responsive leadership, which in turn contribute to strengthening relational trust, shared leadership, and instructional leadership.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.314
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.342 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207