Implementation of Four Leadership Competencies within an Alberta High School
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this exploratory single case study was to focus on a high school principal’s enactment of high-leverage leadership practices that positively influenced teachers’ instructional practices in one high-performing high school in Alberta with a student population above 1,000. Four competencies were examined: (a) embodying visionary leadership, (b) leading a learning community, (c) providing instructional leadership, (d) and developing leadership capacity in determining a shared instructional leadership approach. The study included 10 participants: one principal, three vice principals, five teachers, and one long-serving superintendent within the school authority. The theoretical framework was based on a systems thinking approach. Analysis of the data collected from interviews, documents, artifacts, and reflective journals yielded 11 findings: (a) redesigning the organization; (b) cultivating strategic alignment to the vision; (c) facilitating shared responsibility; (d) promoting and participating in learning and development; (e) developing a robust mentorship program; (f) managing the instructional program; (g) fostering student-centered instructional approaches; (h) improving visibility and accessibility; (i) being data informed; (j) establishing a distributed leadership structure; and (k) identifying, empowering, and recognizing staff. This study concludes with recommendations, including the key recommendation of making a long-term investment in developing a shared approach to instructional leadership capacity at the jurisdiction and school level to support teaching and learning.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".