MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236995777 · doi:10.24124/2002/bpgub1240

School leadership issue: why are teachers not applying for school principal positions?

2002· dissertation· en· W4236995777 on OpenAlexaff
Suzanne Hope Bolin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrincipal (computer security)Economic shortageMentorshipNature versus nurtureFlexibility (engineering)Value (mathematics)PsychologyMathematics educationPedagogyMedical educationPolitical scienceSociologyManagementMedicineMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to determine the factors that are associated with qualified teachers' decisions not to apply for the role of school principal.Recent research has shown that schools in North America are currently facing a shortage of principals and this shortage is expected to continue.In this study, three teachers, who are qualified for the principal's position but are not interested, answered semi-structured interview questions.Their responses were taped, transcribed and analyzed to identify common themes.Findings suggest all of these individuals value the relationships with their students and other teachers.They enjoy teaching and the flexibility that it provides.They perceive the magnitude of the relationships that a principal has to maintain with parents, school board, and senior administration as undesirable.It was concluded that efforts could be made to nurture teachers' interest and knowledge of the principal's role.Support for local courses, job shadowing, and mentorship programs are suggestions that are discussed.If continued effort is made, appropriate solutions can be found to help remedy this shortage.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.277 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCollaborative Teaching and InclusionFrench-language works237,207