MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095152021

Examining the Leadership Role of the Dean of Business in Ontario Colleges:Using Narrative Inquiry to Reflect Leadership Identity Journeys of Selected Deans in this Role

2019· dissertation· en· W3095152021 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kristi-Lee Harrison

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLeadership and Management in Organizations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of International Science and Engineering
KeywordsNarrativeIdentity (music)Narrative inquiryEducational leadershipLeadership studiesManagementPolitical scienceSociologyPedagogyPublic relationsLeadership stylePhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

My research study leadership journeys of selected incumbents in the role of dean of business in the Ontario College System. Using the methodology of narrative inquiry, I wanted to understand how their journeys led them to the role of dean, how they experienced the role, their perceptions of their own leader self-identity, how they approached their learning and growth while in the role, and to what extent they engaged in reflective practice. Participants engaged in two interview sessions with me, responding through dialogue to a guiding set of interview questions. A significant feature of the experience of business deans is that many of them had well-established career roles in business settings and joined the Ontario College System mid-career, most often directly assuming the role of dean. One of the contributions that I am seeking to make through my work is to integrate the stories of their personal career journeys with their leadership identity development and to understand how the Leadership Capability Framework for the Ontario College System captures or misses the requirements for the role of dean of business. Several common themes emerged: (a) they found the program development aspects of their role challenging as they tried to learn the college context that seemed at times esoteric, (b) they perceived their roles and contributions as impactful on their own institutions, (c) they expressed interest in career advancement roles in system but were unsuccessful in securing them, (d) the Leadership Capability Framework was viewed as describing generic not contextual leadership requirements, and (e) their reflective practice was very informal. These findings present implications for the Ontario College System as it seeks to attract, retain, and develop leaders in this role, and for the leadership learning that is required to support leadership development and growth.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0200.013
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicLeadership and Management in OrganizationsFrench-language works237,207