MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6959638636 · doi:10.11575/prism/26365

High School Principal and Student Power Relationships When Students Choose Distance Education Courses

2014· other· en· W6959638636 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2014
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistance educationPrincipal (computer security)Graduation (instrument)Context (archaeology)Power (physics)DisciplineFocus groupGovernmentality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This mixed methods study explains how principals of conventional high schools in Alberta, Canada responded in an educational context where students over the age of 16 did not require their principals’ approval to enroll in external distance education courses. The research questions address this through power relations between principals and students, as manifested by what principals and students said and did in this context. Foucault’s post-structuralist framework of disciplinary, governmentality, and pastoral power techniques provided the theoretical framework for analyzing discursive and nondiscursive practices. Disciplinary power has productive subjects as its focus. Governmentality embodies ways in which states control individuals by dispersing power among populations. The focus of pastoral power is the ethical development of subjects. The initial subjects were 87 Alberta high school principals that completed survey questions capturing demographic data, servant leadership characteristics, and distance education perspectives. Survey results assisted in identifying nine principals that constituted cases in a multiple-case study. The principal and a student at each school participated in interviews that provided primary data. Foucault’s theoretical framework offered 31 power techniques as factors for coding interviews. This study found that the nine principals tended to be conveyors of power, primarily through disciplinary and governmentality techniques. These techniques manifested through three dominant practices: (1) institutionalizing access to distance education courses through the school; (2) supporting course and program choice to increase graduation rates, keep students busy, earn credit funding from the province, and address the life and learning needs of specific students; and (3) assigning students to the classroom option, except in special situations, if both distance education and classroom options were available. The nine students in this study tended to constitute themselves as targets of disciplinary and pastoral power. In the context of distance education course choice, three practices were found to operate synergistically on students: (1) the province, through the school, offered numerous approved programs and choices; (2) students chose classroom and distance education programs or courses they needed or that represented interests; and (3) the school accommodated special life circumstances or learning requirements through classroom and distance education offerings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)Same topicWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyFrench-language works237,207