MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183131609

Holding the reins of the professional learning community: principals' perceptions of the normative imperative to develop schools as professional learning communities

2007· dissertation· en· W3183131609 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2007
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessional learning communityNormativePerceptionProfessional developmentPedagogyPsychologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsSociologyMedical educationMedicineLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study compared the findings from the literature review in the area of schools as professional learning communities, using specifically Toole and Louis’ (2002) definition of a professional learning community, with the perceptions of twelve Manitoba school principals of the normative imperative to develop their schools as professional learning communities and their perceptions of the reality of administrative practice. Toole and Louis propose that a professional learning community is a concept composed of three interdependent domains, namely a school culture that emphasizes professionalism is client centered and knowledge based, additionally it emphasizes learning by placing a high value on teacher inquiry and reflection, and finally it is communitarian insofar as it emphasizes personal connections. Furthermore, this definition is built on the notion that there are preconditions, structural supports and human and social resources, necessary for professional learning communities. Grounded theory served as both the theoretical structure and research design to gain an understanding of principals’ thinking (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). principals participated in this study in two focus groups (six principals in each focus group), and twelve interviews. Each focus group and interview was transcribed, and content analysis was employed to identify commonalities and differences in the data (Gall, Gall & Borg, 2003). Using open, axial, and selective coding eight themes were identified based on the responses to the research questions (Johnson & Christensen, 2004; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). This study revealed some consistency between the information cited in the literature, with specific focus on Toole and Louis’ (2002) definition, and principals’ perceptions of their schools as professional learning communities. The participants perceived of a professional learning community as being comprised of three interdependent domains, which are professional, learning and community, and as requiring necessary structural supports and human and social resources as preconditions. They identified time, teacher empowerment, interconnected teacher roles, school plans and institutional identity as structural supports. They also viewed trust and respect, and supportive principal leadership as human and social resource preconditions for schools striving to become professional learning communities. The study revealed conflict between the beliefs of the principals and conceptions of professional learning communities as theoretically constructed in the literature. The participants perceived that while a professional learning community is multidimensional, its effectiveness is not necessarily tied to measures of student achievement. There appeared to be few differences between the participants’ perceptions when separated by gender, school type (public or private) and school size (small, medium or large). The participants appeared to have limited notions of professional learning communities and as a result it is hard to make a case that professional learning communities exist in these schools. Additionally, they saw the duty to evaluate teachers as fostering the development of a professional learning community. Finally, while professional learning communities may hold the best promise for sustaining school improvement efforts (Hord, 2004), the efforts associated with nurturing one will lack results if principals do not possess the clarity of what is required for a school to become a professional learning community.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.308 · 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