MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092753689

Toward a Conceptualization of Democratic Leadership in a Professional Context.

2020· article· en· W3092753689 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rob Liggett

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationDemocracySociologyContext (archaeology)Leadership styleEducational leadershipShared leadershipArgument (complex analysis)Leadership studiesPedagogyOrganizational cultureTransactional leadershipTeacher leadershipLeadershipInstructional leadershipPublic relationsPolitical sciencePoliticsMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, an argument is advanced with a view to establishing the central principles and premises upon which democratic leadership in school contexts is based. These principles are derived from the findings of a study on the professional leadership culture of one school conducted by this author. The initial study was a qualitative case study that examined, through Schein’s (2010) organizational culture and leadership model, the perceptions of school-level professionals regarding the nature of their professional leadership culture. Numerous findings with rich implications for democratic leadership in professional contexts emerged from the study. Based on these findings, I propose a conceptualization of democratic leadership and suggest ten strategies for its use in school contexts. Finally, I examine possibilities for the development of democratic leadership capacity in school contexts.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.051
Scholarly communication0.0120.013
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0040.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.361
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.061 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and PolicySame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207