Head teacher and government officials’ perceptions of teaching quality in secondary education in Rwanda
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The improvement of teaching quality within secondary schooling has been a core focus within Rwandan educational reforms. Despite this emphasis, efforts towards defining this construct have been minimal, particularly amongst head teachers and government officials who often hold responsibilities in monitoring, evaluating and guiding teaching improvements. To address this gap, this study aimed to shed light on these stakeholders’ perceptions of teaching quality, the extent of alignment between their views and the degree to which they reflected earlier teacher conceptions. Data from this study drew upon semi-structured interviews with 5 head teachers and 11 government officials from three Rwandan districts. Using constant comparison analysis, findings revealed that strong agreement exists between perceptions of stakeholder groups, as evidenced by a shared recognition that teaching inputs, processes and outcomes are vital components of the teaching quality construct. Key differences that emerged included recognition of the impact of external factors on teaching quality and their greater focus on the importance of inclusion compared with teachers. The results suggest a need for greater emphasis on these factors within initiatives focused on improving teaching to better align the expectations of stakeholders concerning teaching quality. These results have implications for policy and for the evaluation and professional development of teachers.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 it