The Scholarship of Educational Leadership in Research-intensive University Contexts: Implications for Promotion and Tenure Supervision
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay draws on inquiry and experience in research-intensive university (RIU) environments to provide a theoretical framework for the scholarship of educational leadership (SoEL), as well as practical examples for its strategic use within the context of supervising promotion and tenure (P&T) processes. We argue that the SoEL has significant benefits for RIUs: SoEL is strategically aligned with RIU mandates for sustained and productive scholarly activity; SoEL fosters an institutional culture of educational scholarship aimed at enhancing effective, efficient, and strategically aligned curricula and pedagogical practices; and SoEL has the potential to have a significant and strategic impact on P&T supervision. Based on communities of practice and inquiry-based learning, we reason that SoEL is central to well-founded and richly informed institution and Faculty-level educational reform. Applications of SoEL for P&T supervision are provided, as well as key institutional challenges and potential causes for optimism.
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 | 0.082 | 0.151 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; 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".