Exploring Perceptions of Education Experts Regarding “Creative School” and Its Leadership Role in Public Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Creative school is an integrative system that secures a school environment that encourages creativity and inventiveness. It also highly depends on modern technology in all its educational and administration processes, in addition to means of communication with students and parents. The current study aims at exploring the perceptions of education experts regarding the concept of creative school and requirements of its leadership. The study adopted the qualitative method in which a sample of 21 experts were selected from those concerned with the field of study; 13 of them were staff members in Saudi Universities and 8 leaders of Saudi public schools throughout the academic year 2018–2019. The findings revealed that the creative school carried several names: intelligent school, creativity-developing school, and active teaching school. All experts agree that such schools secure a propitious environment for creativity and inventiveness and provide various advanced skills and programs subjected to balanced international criteria, which are conscious of international awareness with global issues, and environment programs. The findings also revealed that the foremost supports of creative schools are financing and social backup. It also unveiled that there are several abnormal roles for creative school leaders that suit nature and objectives of the school, in addition to requirements for creative school leadership as manifested in openness to organizational flexible structures along with a cooperative leadership that institutes technology. The study specified the foremost challenges facing leaders of the creative school, which is variety of skills needed for school 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 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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".