School leaders as change agents: Do principals have the tools they need?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the current climate of accountability and calls for school improvement, principals are dealing with unceasing demands to implement new educational reforms. Yet do school leaders feel equipped to implement these mandates? This study investigated the perceptions of experienced elementary principals on whether they felt prepared to be effective change agents. Findings showed that principals felt they had received very little professional development on how to be a leader of change. Instead, their professional learning as change agents occurred through on the job experience and networking with trusted colleagues. This resulted in knowledge gaps in principals’ understanding of the change process. School leaders bear the responsibility of implementing change, yet principals suggest that reforms would see increased success if they were a shared responsibility with district leaders. Insights from experienced principals may help guide improved professional learning practices to provide educational leaders with the necessary skills to lead effective school improvement.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 it