Community-Based Participatory Research in Education: Empowering Women School Leaders in KwaZulu-Natal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has emerged as a robust methodology to foster collaboration and empowerment in educational contexts. This paper explores the application of CBPR in the context of education, focusing specifically on its role in empowering women school leaders in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Through a qualitative research approach, this study was conducted in close collaboration with women school leaders and with community stakeholders and schools’ active and integral participation. The findings of this study underscore the importance of community-based participatory approaches in empowering women school leaders and advancing gender equity in educational leadership in KwaZulu-Natal. The key findings highlight the following themes: gendered power dynamics in educational leadership, the impact of CBPR on women’s empowerment, identification of empowerment strategies, collective action and community support, and the potential for transformative change. These findings provide valuable insights for policymakers, educators, and community stakeholders, serving as a guide for promoting inclusive and equitable educational practices. Keywords: Community-based participatory research, women school leader, feminist theory, critical pedagogy, patriarchy
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 | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".