Bibliographic record
Abstract
Citation (2022), "Index", Armstrong, P.W. and Brown, C. (Ed.) School-to-School Collaboration: Learning Across International Contexts, Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 245-251. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-80043-668-820221015 Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited Copyright © 2022 Paul Wilfred Armstrong and Chris Brown INDEX Note: Page numbers followed by “n” indicate notes. Accelerated Education Programme (see Accelerated learning programme) Accelerated learning programme, 126–127 Accountability, 19–20 Across schoolteachers (ASTs), 12, 15–16, 21 Agency, 151 Assemblage, 151 Associate principals (APs), 21–22 Attainment Advisors, 36n1 Autonomous Community of Catalonia, 169 Barcelona Education Consortium, 169, 174 Bottom-up autonomy, 74 Butler Act (1944), 141 Canada, 44 Catalan Education Law (LEC), 169 Catholic Church, 138–140, 142 Centre for Education Development (CED), 112 Chengdu Province, constructing education groups in, 66–71 Child centre, 92 Child Centre A, 96–97 Child Centre B, 97–98 Child Centre Integration Model (CCIM), 92, 98–100 Childcare services, 92 Chilean education system, 80 CIN, 81–82 enhancing trust in school improvement network, 83–85 Research Teams, 85–86 Chilean Ministry of Education (MINEDUC), 83 China, education groups in, 62–63 Churches, 138 City Primary Heads Group (CPHG), 217 City TSA, 214 Clear policy guidelines, lack of, 130–131 Co-dependent leadership roles and structures, 20–23 Coherence TSA, 216–217, 219 Cohesion/regulation matrix, 2–4, 18 in Kenyan School System, 124–127 structure and management of German school system, 191–193 Cohesive leadership system, 31 Collaboration, 12, 22, 31–32, 80, 99, 150 (see also Interprofessional collaboration (IPC)) enablers and barriers to school-to-school collaboration, 18–23 experienced way of New Zealand CoLs, 13 extent of school-to-school collaboration, 16–18 frameworks for, 158 key lessons for practice and policy, 23 in Ontario education system, 45–48 shifting classifications of school to school collaboration, 14–16 shifting towards, 143–146 Collaboration network, 155 background and characteristics of, 155–158 Collaborative Action Research (CAR), 33 approach, 34 Collaborative activity, 1 Collaborative cultures, 151–152 Collaborative enquiry, 33 Collaborative inquiry, 150 Collaborative inquiry networks (CIN), 81 path for learning during critical challenges, 81–82 Collaborative practices, 12 Collaborative Professionalism, 46 Collective agency, 153 Collective efficacy, 153, 155 Collegiality, 152 Communities of Learning (CoL), 12–13, 18 activity, 16 coupling, 14–15 leaders, 19–20 roles, 17 Comparative analysis, 144 Competence-based curriculum, 125, 127–128 Competition, 129 Competition, 80 Competitive activity, 21 Concordat approach, 29 Conflict, 21 Consistency, 128 Contextualization, 19 Continuous Professional Development (CPD), 219 Contrived collegiality, 151–152 Cooperation, 152 networks, 194 Coordination, 99 Cornering, 18 Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS), 142 Council of Ontario Directors of Education (CODE), 46 Creativity, 128 Cross-group collaboration, 156 Cultural bias, 18 Cultural theory framework, 17 Curriculum for Excellence (CfE), 31–32 Decentralization, 108 Deputy principals (DPs), 21–22 Development networks, 194 Devolved School Management (DSM), 30 Diagnosticography, 84 DigiSchulNet project, 195–197 Distributed leadership, 31–32 Divergence, 18 Divided schools, 138 Durham Catholic District School Board (DCDSB), 48n2 Dutch Educational and Childcare System, 92–94 Dutch national level Inspectorate of Education, 94 Early childhood education (ECE), 92 Eastern City, TSAs in, 214–219 Education (see also Shared education) markets, 141–142 in Northern Ireland, 140 policy, 111, 124 system, 139 Education Act (1947), 141 Education Act (1989), 14 Education Authority, 145 Education group, 62 barriers to construction, 71–72 in China, 62–63 constructing education groups in Chengdu Province, 66–71 review of policies on construction, 63–65 students in school B by household registration, 69 teaching skills competition, 68 Education in Motion (EiM), 155 Education Quality Accountability Office (EQAO), 45 Education Review Office (ERO), 15 Educational improvement, 1 Educational leadership, 171 Educational policy reforms, 2 Educational subsidy distributions, 110 Educational transformation, 170 Equity and inclusion, 1 Erasmus+ mobility-based programmes, 114–115 eTwinning, 114–115 Evidence, 80 Evidence-Based Education (EBE), 156 Exchange networks, 194 Exclusive alliances, 212 Executive Office, 144 Executive Principals, 12 ‘Fatalist’ approach, 109–112 Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), 197 General Education Reform Model, 146 German governance model, 193 German school system, 190 structure and management, 191–193 Germany, 190 classification of school networks, 193–194, 201–202 examples, 197 key lessons for policy, 202 networks, management and leadership, 199–201 impact of networks and conditions for success, 195–197 PeSs, 197–199 structure and management of German School System, 191–193 Governance, 210 Greater Essex County District School Board (GECDSB), 48n2 Grid group theory, 35 Hierarchical alliances, 212 Hierarchist system, 138–141 Hierarchy, 211 High-performing schools, 62, 64 ‘High-performing Schools Go West Project’, 65 Hood’s matrix, 151–152, 161 Hood’s seven reverse-effect mechanisms, 22 Human Capital Operational Programme, 112 Impactful school-to-school collaboration, 27 Incentivizing process, 19, 21 Initial teacher training (ITT), 211 International collaborations, 44 International school partnerships, 114 International school-to-school collaboration case study in, 155 network, 151 Internationally Networked Professional Learning Communities (ILNPLC), 44 Interprofessional collaboration (IPC), 92 changes in children’s (school) day, 95 Dutch Educational and Childcare System, 92–94 increased numbers of children at risk in complex societies, 94–95 key lessons for practice and policy, 104 perceived barriers to engaging in, 100–102 scarcity of professionals and shrinking rural regions, 95–98 trend towards IPC in Netherlands, 94–98 understanding differences in, 98–100 Investing for Educational Success (IES), 12 initiative, 15, 20 Irish Free State, 138 Irish government, 139 Irish Republican Army (IRA), 139 Join-the-dots approach, 22 K-12 education, 44 Kāhui Ako, 12–13 Kenya Basic Education Act, 124 Kenyan education system, 124 cohesion/regulation matrix in Kenyan School System, 124–127 enablers of school-to-school collaboration, 127–131 key lessons for practice and policy, 131 Kenyan school governance model, 124 KMK, 191 Knowledge mobilization, 55 Language and Social Cohesion (LIC), 174 Leadership, 31, 128–129, 211 Leading Student Achievement initiative (LSA initiative), 47 Learning ecosystems, 170–172 Local authorities (LAs), 33, 36, 210 culture, 35 Loosely coupled model, 62–63, 66 Low-performing schools, 62 Marketized alliances, 212 Markets, 211 MAT, 218n6 Math Councils, 56–57 Maths Hubs, 219–220 Meta-governance, 212 Minban education (people-run education), 63 Ministerial Advisory Group, 144 Ministry of Education, 46 Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 94 Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, 92 Monsignor John Pereyma Catholic Secondary School in Oshawa, 49 Mood–meter, 84 Multi-academy trusts (MATs), 210 National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics (NCETM), 219n8 National Party, 13 National Policy, 28 National Schools system, 139 Netherlands, 92 trend towards IPC in, 94–98 Network (s), 153, 210–211 initiators, 197 of Innovative Schools in Germany programme, 190 Network for shared school improvement (NSSI), 145 Network for Social and Educational Equity (NSEE), 34–37 Network learning system (NLS), 85–86 Networking, 80 in Chile, 81 initiatives, 80 ‘Networks for Change’ programme, 168 assessment, 168–170 key lessons, 182–185 learning ecosystems, 170–172 methods, 172 professional learning network to network of action and educational change in schools, 181–182 school networks to co-responsible ecosystems for educational change, 175–178 teachers of schools participating in programme, 173–174 team of facilitators of programme, 174 teams of school leaders, 172–173 weaving connections between teachers beyond territorial networks, 179–180 New Public Management (NPM), 14 New Zealand case, 13 collaborative school system, 12 education system, 18 Labour Government, 14 schools, 16, 23 self-managing school system, 18 New Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI), 15 Next practice concept, 145 Non-governmental organizations (NGOs), 111 Non-hierarchical decision-making, 21 North Rhine–Westphalian State Institute for the Quality and Support of Schools (QUA-LiS), 199 Northern Ireland, 138–140 education in, 140 equivalent of 1988 Education Act in England, 141–142 legislation, 142 Troubles, 141, 143 Norway–Canada collaboration (NORCAN collaboration), 44, 48 collaboration in Ontario education system, 45–48 collaborative structures, processes, relationships, and trust, 49–51 design, 48–49 key lessons for policy and practice, 57–58 Ontario education system, 44–45 professional learning and agency, 53–55 sharing knowledge and de-privatizing practices, 55–57 student voice, agency, and leadership, 51–53 One-unit model, 62, 66 Ontario, 44, 48 Ontario Certified Teacher (OCT), 45 Ontario education system, 44–45 collaboration in, 45–48 Ontario Ministry of Education, 44 Ontario Secondary School Literacy Test (OSSLT), 45 Ontario Teachers’ Federation (OTF), 47 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 12 Out-of-school care (OSC), 92, 97 Overview effect, 50, 56 Partnership, 210, 212 working, 32–36 Pedagogical Resources Centers (CRP), 174 Poland, 108 barriers, 115–117 education system, 109–112 key lessons for practice and policy, 117–119 post-1989 education policy, 116 SSC in, 108, 112–115 Policy, 141 consensus, 31 coordination, 71 Polish education system, 109, 111 Post-pandemic recovery, 1 Post-socialist transformations, 108 Potenziale Entwickeln–Schulen Stärken (PeSs), 197–199 Preservice teachers, 86 Primary education, 94, 191 Private international school-to-school collaboration, 150 Professional development programme (PD programme), 81, 83–84 Professional jealousy, 21 Professional learning, 31–32, 44 network to network of action and educational change in schools, 181–182 Professional learning communities (PLCs), 12, 158 Professional networks, 168 Programme for International Student Assessment test (PISA test), 12 Progressive curriculum, 127–128 Provincial Knowledge Exchange (PKE), 47–48 Psychopedagogical Guidance Team (EAP), 177 Public systems, 15 Pupil Equity Fund (PEF), 30 Pupil:teacher ratio, 130 Reflexivity, 163–164 Regional MAT TSA, 214, 218–219 Regulation, 2–3, 28 Relational trust, 150 Research, 81 Research Teams, 85–86 Robert Owen Centre (ROC), 28, 32–33, 36 School collaboration, 62 in Ontario, 47 School development, 190 School governance, 30 School improvement, 150 background and characteristics of collaboration network, 155–158 beliefs and enabling and hindering factors, 158–160 case study in international school-to-school collaboration, 155 case study methodology, 153–154 frameworks for collaboration, 158 key lessons for practice and policy, 161–163 reflexivity, 163–164 relationship continuum, 160–161 teacher principles of collaboration, 154–155 School improvement networks (SIN), 83 School Improvement Partnership Programme (SIPP), 33–35 School leadership, 190 School networks, 190 classification, 193–194 to co-responsible ecosystems for educational change, 175–178 in Germany, 201–202 School partnerships, 145, 210–211 School principals, 12 School systems, 2 School-to-school ‘partnership’ approach, 150 School-to-school collaboration (SSC), 1, 44, 108, 210 barriers to, 18–23 enablers, 18–23, 127–131 extent of, 16–18 in Poland, 108, 112–115 polish experiences, 108 shifting classifications, 14–16 Schoolteachers, 86 Scotland lessons learned, 37–38 partnership working, 32–36 policy, 29–32 school-to-school collaboration in, 27 sociocultural perspectives on public service reform, 28 Scotland Act (1998), 29 Scottish education, 29 Scottish system, 29 Self-governance, 30 Self-governing school, 29 Self-improving school-led school system (SISS), 210 trajectories for teaching schools in, 210–213 Shared education, 137–138 churches and divided schools, 138 education markets, 141–142 hierarchist system, 138–141 key lessons for practice and policy, 147 shifting towards collaboration, 143–146 Shared management mechanism, 67 Social capital, 175 Social cohesion, 2, 28 matrix, 92 Social regulation, 28 Social regulation/cohesion matrix, 13–14, 45 Special (educational) needs (SEN), 97, 104 Standing Advisory Commission for Human Rights (SACHR), 142 Student voice, 51–53 SUCCESS TSA, 213–216 Sustainability, 17 Symposiums, 125–126 Teacher Agency (2015), 151–152 Teacher Learning and Leadership Programme (TLLP), 47–48 Teachers, 81 collaboration, 151 educators, 86 isolation, 86 principles of collaboration, 154–155 Teaching School Alliances (TSAs), 210 in Eastern City, 214–219 existing networks, 213 mandated collaboration as source of tension between, 219–220 trajectories for teaching schools in SISS, 210–213 Teaching Schools, 211 government-funded evaluation, 212 Teaching Scotland’s Future (TSF), 31 Tecumseh Vista Academy in Windsor, 49 Top-down initiative, 63, 65–66, 63 Transfer networks, 194 Transversality, 177–178 Trust, 71, 150 enhancing trust in school improvement network, 83–85 University researchers, 33 Visegrad Group countries, 111 Within schoolteachers (WSTs), 12, 15, 21 Book Chapters Prelims Introduction Section 1: Hierarchist Systems Chapter 1: New Zealand Cases of Collaboration within and Between Schools: The Coexistence of Cohesion and Regulation Chapter 2: Local Authorities and School-to-School Collaboration in Scotland Chapter 3: School Participation in Local and International Collaboration: The Norway–Canada (NORCAN) Programme Chapter 4: Education Groups as a Chinese Way of School Collaboration for Education Improvement Section 2: Fatalist Systems Chapter 5: Barriers for Effective Networking in Competitive Environments: Addressing Distrust and Isolation to Promote Collaboration in the Chilean School System Chapter 6: Interprofessional Collaboration Between Childcare Services and Primary Schools in the Netherlands Chapter 7: School-to-School Collaboration in Poland: Mapping (Untapped) Potential Chapter 8: School-to-School Collaboration – Kenyan Context Section 3: Egalitarian Systems Chapter 9: School Collaboration in a Divided Society: Shared Education in Northern Ireland Chapter 10: Moving Beyond a Narrative of School Improvement: How and Why Should We Create Purpose-driven and Impactful Collaboration for Educators? Chapter 11: From Professional School Networks to Learning Ecosystems: The Case of Networks for Change in Barcelona Chapter 12: Germany: School-to-School Collaboration at the Interface of Bureaucracy and Autonomy Section 4: Fatalist Systems Chapter 13: School-to-School Collaboration Through Teaching School Alliances in England: ‘System Leadership’ in a Messy and Hybrid Governance Context Index
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.472 | 0.009 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".