Practice and Theory: Ten Lessons that I Have Learned about Being a Vice Principal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The vice principal has the potential to significantly influence everyone in the school building. The expertise required to effectively carry out the duties of the role include interpersonal skills, leadership skills, reflective practice, and knowledge of the current research in the field of education. The position of vice principal requires a skillful blend o f practice and theory to successfully maximize the role’s impact on students and staff. Foremost among the necessary skills is interpersonal relationships, as the majority of the vice principal’s activities involve interactions with students, staff, parents, support staff, and members of the community. While often viewed as a preparatory stage prior to becoming a principal, the vice principal position has a significant impact on the lives of many people. It is therefore important that the vice principal build a repertoire of skills and knowledge in order to maximize the positive impact that the vice principal exerts. To that end, this paper describes 10 lessons the author learned as a vice principal in Ontario, Canada, and the theory underpinning those lessons that also had to be learned in order to make the role as effective as possible. This blending of theory and practice is imperative for the vice principal’s role to be as effective as possible for students and educational institutions. This paper provides a practitioner’s viewpoint of how theory supports practice. While functioning in the role, the author had the opportunity to impact the lives of a large number of students and staff. In addition, the author learned a great deal about current research and how it applies to the role of vice principal. By typifying the role of lifelong learner, a vice principal can maximize their impact while also serving as a role model for aspiring school administrators.
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 | 0.021 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.052 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".