Characteristics of the Authority Basis of Icelandic Compulsory School Principals in Comparison to Other TALIS Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to explore the authority basis of compulsory school principals in Iceland by making a general comparison to the other participating countries in the OECD Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2018, as well as by using Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory. The study utilizes data from principals in 48 of the countries that participated in the TALIS 2018. The authority bases of the principals and of the other governing agents are explored with regard to the key task areas, which range from managerial to curriculum tasks. The authority basis of the principals and the other agents in Iceland has commonalities with most of the other Nordic countries, as well as with Baltic countries, Anglophone countries (except for Canada (Alberta)), and with many Eastern European countries. On the basis of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions model, Iceland is “individualist”, with a low “power distance”, and it allocates more responsibility to the principals and to the other school agents at the school level than it does to the authorities. The major implication of this study for the Icelandic context is the need to enhance and strengthen the role of the school boards in terms of the professional support for principals.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".