MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388086622 · doi:10.1080/13603124.2023.2272142

Leadership perspectives among high school principals in Jamaica: implications for school leadership development and policy

2023· article· en· W4388086622 on OpenAlexafffund
Ann E. Lopez, Carmel Roofe

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Leadership in Education · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEducational leadershipInstructional leadershipLeadership styleSociologyLeadershipPedagogySchool administrationLeadership developmentPsychologyPolitical sciencePublic relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

School leadership is an important factor in student achievement and learning outcomes and has garnered the attention of policymakers globally. And while the field is growing there is not enough knowledge generation from school leaders in emerging economies. This article examines school leadership theorizing and practice of high school principals in Jamaica. The purpose of this qualitative study is to examine how school principals in Jamaica make sense of their leadership practices and how they use this knowledge to respond to their school contexts and shifting socio-cultural dynamics. Using a narrative interview approach data were collected from 13 high school principals. The findings presented in this article indicate that a) high school principals in Jamaica theorized their leadership approaches drawing on various leadership paradigms; b) high school principals perceived their leadership as inextricably linked to the community context of the school; c) the importance of building relationships with members of the community; and d) the importance of leadership preparation and development to their work as school 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.906

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.254
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Leadership in EducationSame topicEducation Systems and PolicyFrench-language works237,207