Bibliographic record
Abstract
A restorative approach to education emphasizes that educators play a critical role in building relationships amongst school stakeholders. This case study examined the four-year journey of leading a school to implement and sustain a restorative culture. A theoretical framework for restorative practices was established around relational leadership theory and dialogue, providing the foundation for this research. The research addressed the need for studying the leading of restorative culture change from a relational perspective, while highlighting the need for leadership to establish spaces, processes, attitudes, language, and questions for establishing effective dialogue to initiate the building and sustaining of effective relations. Although the restorative culture was described by some as “diluted” by the end of the initiative, it was evident that restorative practices remained integral to the daily educational practices as a result of the four-year initiative by school leadership to integrate restorative approaches into daily practices. Key words: relational leadership, restorative practices, school culture, dialogue Une approche réparatrice de l'éducation souligne que les éducateurs jouent un rôle essentiel dans l'établissement de relations entre les parties prenantes de l'école. Cette étude de cas examine le parcours de quatre ans de la direction d'une école pour mettre en œuvre et maintenir une culture réparatrice. Un cadre théorique pour les pratiques réparatrices a été établi autour de la théorie du leadership relationnel et du dialogue, ce qui constitue le fondement de cette recherche. La recherche a répondu au besoin d'étudier la gestion du changement de la culture réparatrice d'un point de vue relationnel, tout en soulignant la nécessité pour le leadership d'établir des espaces, des processus, des attitudes, un langage et des questions pour établir un dialogue efficace afin d'initier la construction et le maintien de relations efficaces. Bien que la culture réparatrice ait été décrite par certains comme "diluée" à la fin de l'initiative, il était évident que les pratiques réparatrices restaient partie intégrante des pratiques éducatives quotidiennes suite à l'initiative de quatre ans de la direction de l'école pour intégrer les approches réparatrices dans les pratiques quotidiennes. Mots-clés : leadership relationnel, pratiques réparatrices, culture scolaire, dialogue
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 | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".